United we stand in the queue for border control!

By Dominika Rokosz

Several EU countries have imposed internal border controls, and those who are newly joining the Schengen Agreement introduced controls as soon as possible. Is this trend a threat to European integrity? With Austria and France set to end their border controls by mid-April, is there a hope for a change?

Echoes of 2015

The issue of border controls within the Schengen Area first gained prominence following the 2015 Migration Crisis when large numbers of refugees and migrants entered the EU. In the aftermath, countries such as Germany, France, and Sweden extended their border controls beyond the usual six-month period, citing concerns about security and public order. While the countries still complied with the Schengen Agreement, which stipulates that such controls should only be used as a last resort and must not exceed a total of six months, such actions as introducing border controls within a “free-movement” area sparked controversy.

Where’s the catch?

The original regulations had a significant loophole. There was no limit on the number of times a country could reintroduce border checks, as long as a serious threat to public policy or internal security was identified. This meant that countries could repeatedly invoke internal border controls whenever they deemed it necessary.

In response, the European Parliament acknowledged the shortcomings of the existing framework and proposed new rules to limit the scope and duration of such measures.

In 2018, they suggested setting a two-month limit for the initial period of border checks, with the possibility of extending it for up to a year. The idea was to prevent border checks from becoming a regular solution, making sure they were only used in truly exceptional situations and for a limited time.

In April 2022, the Court of Justice of the EU declared the persistent granting of such short-term controls illegal. Under the new regulations, countries can only reintroduce border controls after the initial six-month period if they face, here's the novelty, a new, specific threat to security or public policy. The ruling was based on the idea that six months should be enough time for countries to address such threats without relying on recurring border checks.

New rules, same mindset

In May 2024, the Council of the EU approved a major update to the Schengen Borders Code. This revision allows internal border controls to last for up to two years, with the possibility of a six-month extension in exceptional cases.

This extension can be renewed once, meaning border controls could potentially remain in place for as long as three years under extreme circumstances, which still remains an imperfect solution.

This shift gives EU member states more leeway in maintaining internal controls, especially when faced with persistent threats. The new regulations will take effect in June 2024.

Since then six countries have introduced internal border controls lasting six months: Slovenia and Italy for a year with an end in late June 2025, Austria from June 2024 to April 2025, and Denmark and Sweden from November 2024 with an end in May 2025. Germany’s measures are set to last until March 2025, with a possible extension as far as September. We will soon find out if Austria and France decide to follow suit, further complicating the situation.

Warm welcome

Perhaps most notably, Bulgaria introduced its own border controls immediately after officially joining the Schengen Area. Such a decision stands in stark contrast to the Schengen Agreement’s founding principles. How can the Schengen Area maintain its credibility if new members undermine its foundational values?

What does it say about an agreement that was supposed to foster union and trust when countries immediately after joining defy the core ideas of the agreement? In the uncertain times that we find ourselves right now shouldn’t we be focusing on creating a stronger union between the countries?

While I understand that ensuring security for its citizens should be the country's priority, my personal experiences seem to clash with the ideal of European unity I envisioned in my mind. In speeches given either in the European Parliament, European Commission, or in front of the cameras, we hear promises and the ideal of Europe as a unified entity pushing forward. Yet, the reality often feels starkly different, when we are exposed to spending half an hour in car traffic on the border crossing between countries.

The Schengen Area promised free trade and free movement. As someone who benefits from this, being able to write this, while studying in a different country I am grateful for it all.

While the current situation is not to be deemed a crisis right now, I worry that if these tendencies persist, we might end up heading down an uncertain path.

Enemy at the gates

The reintroduction of border controls comes hand in hand with nationalist and populist movements in Europe. Countries like Hungary, Poland, and Italy are seeing political parties that emphasize national sovereignty and security over EU cooperation. In order for a country to become a part of the European Union, it needs to sign the Treaty on European Union, which states that EU law overrides conflicting national law.

Because of that for many of these movements, the EU has become a symbol of a threat to national identity, limiting sovereignty and enforcing uniform policies such as Euro currency. Additionally, the Schengen Agreement removes internal borders, making it harder to manage immigration and control the country. Not to mention that efforts to promote a shared European identity are seen as diluting national traditions.

Schengen: Patchworked or Patched?

With the persistent use of internal border controls, what does it say about the future of Schengen?. If member states continue to focus on their own agendas, will the Schengen Area remain the way we know it now? With mounting security concerns across Europe, EU leaders must weigh the long-term consequences of this shift. Instead of building walls between nations, and prioritise collaboration over division to tackle their shared

challenges.

From migration to economic instability and geopolitical tensions, the EU’s success will depend on whether its members can move beyond nationalism and embrace collective solutions for the greater good.

The question remains, can they?