Mid-Term Review of the Implementation Phase
Step by Step Towards a European Asylum and Migration Policy

06/24/2025

Amid intensifying geopolitical instability, evolving labour market demands, and internal political shifts, the European Union finds itself at a turning point in its approach to migration governance.

At the centre of this evolving agenda lies the implementation of the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum. Following its adoption in 2024, the Pact represents a rare moment of political convergence across member states. Yet, the transition from legislative agreement to operational effectiveness, to be achieved until June 2026, remains uneven. The mid-term implementation review reflects both progress and persistent gaps: improved border procedures, expanded data systems, and reinforced reception capacities have been met with varying degrees of national engagement and preparedness.

A recent high-level dialogue among policymakers, experts, and civil society, jointly hosted by the European Policy Centre and the Hanns-Seidel-Stiftung, explored the balance the EU must strike between pragmatism and principle in shaping a coherent, future-oriented migration policy.

Held under the banner of the Building Bridges initiative, the event sought to reconcile innovative solutions with real-world constraints, domestic and international alike. Discussions centred on the implementation of the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum, the strategic use of leverage in migration diplomacy, and the implications of global aid retrenchment, particularly by the United States.

The Commission continues to play a critical role in supporting implementation - technically, financially, and politically. However, structural issues remain unresolved. Disagreements over responsibility-sharing and allocation mechanisms continue to undermine the solidarity principle that is central to the Pact’s success. The forthcoming legal reforms aim to facilitate smoother cooperation, but their effectiveness will ultimately depend on political commitment and national ownership.

This internal transformation is occurring against a backdrop of declining global migration aid and increasing demands for EU leadership. With key international donors reducing their engagement, the EU is being pushed into a more prominent global role. This shift introduces both opportunity and risk: The Union can redefine migration diplomacy through rights-based, impact-driven frameworks - but only if it avoids the pitfalls of transactionalism and fragmentation.

Between Innovative Solutions and New Geopolitical Realities: Rethinking the EU’s External Migration Agenda

External migration governance, too, is being recalibrated. Legal pathways are increasingly framed not only as a response to irregular migration, but also as a lever for labour market resilience and international cooperation. At the same time, the ethical and strategic limits of return partnerships and third-country arrangements are being tested. As political conditions shift in partner countries, trust-based collaboration becomes harder to sustain.

While there is broad consensus on the need for innovation, caution is advised. Calls for new tools and programmes must be matched with rigorous evaluation of past instruments. A key insight from the discussion was that novelty should not displace institutional learning. Integrating external migration efforts into broader development and foreign policy frameworks - such as regional stability and entrepreneurship - offers potential, but only with coordinated governance and clear accountability.

Another central theme is the asymmetry between EU-level ambition and national-level implementation. Legal migration remains underutilized, despite its strategic relevance. This is partly due to the enduring view that migration management is primarily a national competence. Efforts to enhance coherence between EU initiatives and domestic systems, without undermining subsidiarity, will be vital to unlocking the potential of shared migration governance.

A more inclusive and holistic approach was also advocated, one that expands geographic focus beyond immediate transit countries and addresses the entire migration route. This implies rethinking funding models, leveraging development cooperation more flexibly, and engaging with regional actors more meaningfully.

Finally, the notion of leverage emerged as a double-edged sword. While financial and political tools are available, how they are deployed matters greatly. Conditionality can erode partnerships if perceived as coercive, and migration diplomacy risks becoming instrumentalised by both sides. A smarter, fairer EU migration system will require careful calibration of incentives, responsibilities, and long-term commitments.

Looking forward

As the EU prepares for the next phase of implementation, the challenge is not merely technical but fundamentally political. The evolving context calls for a migration governance model that is responsive to complexity, rooted in core values, and equipped with strategic foresight. Whether this moment represents a genuine turning point will depend on the EU’s ability to align its tools, institutions, and Member States around a shared vision—one that goes beyond crisis management to establish sustainable, rights-based migration governance.

Despite the progress achieved so far, political commitment and ownership by Member States remain essential. Alongside the proposed Return Regulation, the revised concept of a safe third country, and the EU list of safe countries of origin, a lot more effort is needed to establish a modern European migration and asylum system within the coming year.

The next progress report is scheduled for publication in October 2025.