In contrast, migrants in the richer north find comparatively well-run asylum centers and generous resettlement policies. But these harder-to-reach countries often cater to migrants who have the wherewithal to navigate entry-point states or obtain expensive travel documents that ensure safe air passage with the assistance of traffickers. These countries remain inaccessible to most migrants looking for work or international protection.
How has the European Union responded?
As with the sovereign-debt crisis, national interests have consistently trumped European ones in the areas of migration and asylum. This was illustrated in 2011, when France briefly reintroduced border controls in the free-movement Schengen area, a cornerstone of the European project, in response to the influx of thousands of Tunisian and Libyan refugees in neighboring Italy.
The adoption of "fortress" policies by several EU member states has come at a high cost, some rights groups contend. In Greece, the implementation of stricter border-control operations, like its Aspida program, has taken precedence over reforming a dysfunctional asylum system. In Italy, the country's expansive Mare Nostrum (or "Our Sea") rescue program was phased out in October 2014, only to be replaced by Frontex's more limited Triton program, which has a third of the operating budget of its predecessor.
The more economically stable northern countries have continued to offer more inclusive migration and asylum policies. In September 2013, Sweden announced that it would offer permanent residency to all Syrian refugees. Germany also committed to offering ten thousand Syrian refugees temporary residency in 2013. But some experts say these policies run counter to the trend of anti-immigrant sentiment that is gaining hold in both countries as well as across much of Europe.
"The backdrop to this [growing anti-immigrant sentiment] is the difficulty that many European countries have in integrating minorities into the social mainstream. Many of these immigrants are coming from Muslim countries, and the relationship between immigrant Muslim communities and the majority populations is not good," says former CFR Senior Fellow Charles Kupchan.
The recent economic crisis has also spurred a demographic shift across the continent, with citizens of crisis-hit states migrating to the north in record numbers in search of work. And while the issue of intra-EU migration has sparked anxiety over social welfare benefits in recent months, "those who are coming from the Middle East and North Africa tend to provoke more heated political debate because of this issue of communal cleavage and integration," says Kupchan.
What are the main proposals for managing the crisis?
Prompted by the unprecedented number of migrant deaths at sea in April 2015, the EU adopted a wide-ranging ten-point plan to curb the tide of migrants and asylum seekers along the Mediterranean. However, some critics charge that the plan's targeting of smugglers fails to recognize the larger problem of failed states in the Middle East and Africa that leave many with no recourse but to flee. European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker was also quick to point out that the plan would require a funding commitment from all twenty-eight member states. The expected wrangling among crash-strapped governments could slow the implementation of any new policy measures.
Separately, the European Parliament voted in favor of establishing a framework for a common European asylum system in June 2013. However, implementation and enforcement across the twenty-eight-member bloc remains a challenge, and many policymakers say that the legal framework lacks clarity and still gives too much discretion to member states.
"Migration is an issue that strikes at the heart of sovereignty. It's about national identity, economic competitiveness, security - so it's not surprising that governments are not willing to cede much ground," says CSIS's Conley.
While most EU member states have generally been receptive to recommendations for expanded maritime patrols in the Mediterranean and the adoption of technology and information sharing tools, there has been less agreement about instituting policies that safeguard the rights of asylum seekers and migrants.
Experts say that any movement on immigration reform will be difficult with nationalist parties across the continent continuing to make significant gains and the threat of European jihadists returning home from the Middle East and North Africa continues to hold sway in public.
What are the potential consequences of an inadequate EU response?
The lack of a coordinated EU response to Middle Eastern and African migration in the near-to-mid-term is illustrative of the ways in which individual countries continue to see this issue through the lens of national security rather than international protection.
"The political response of countries pushing migrants out or incarcerating them for long stretches runs counter to the very values that the EU promotes, like protecting human life and the right to asylum," says Conley.
In addition to undermining core values of the EU, Conley fears that a sustained influx of migrants could spur more member states to suspend Schengen, as Denmark and France did in 2011, for longer stretches of time. "I suspect if the politics surrounding migration really start getting messy, you'll see countries reintroducing internal borders with greater frequency, which means they would have chiseled away at one of the main pillars of Europe, which is the free movement of people," she says.
