"It was like on a roller coaster: the last precipice was used to climb the hill". In the semi-deserted Luxembourg Congress Palace, D-Day on migration turns into the day after: pats on the back and tasty anecdotes. The turning point came with the introduction of the revision clause of the Pact on Migration. Because the reform is a leap in the dark and no one knows for sure how it will pass from paragraphs to facts. Then there are the political implications to be taken into account. Hungary and Poland, which voted against, are already shooting at zero. Giorgia Melon, on the other hand, considers the agreement "a step forward" and notes that in the EU there is finally "a change of priorities".
But let's start with the losers. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban thundered on Facebook that "Brussels abuses its power" because it wants to "relocate migrants to Hungary by force and this is unacceptable." So a fake news good and good because the agreement establishes the principle of "mandatory solidarity" but transfers remain voluntary. Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki is more factual. "The mandatory relocation - i.e. the financial contribution of 20 thousand euros per person - does not solve the problem of migration but violates the sovereignty of member states: Poland will not pay for the mistakes of other countries' migration policies". And on this we will see.
The process to get to the publication in the official journal of the new Pact is still long and on the other hand in Luxembourg the EU Council has given the green light only to two crucial elements of the reform, which consists of a mosaic of measures. Now, in fact, the ball is in the so-called trialogue, where the Council, the Commission and Parliament must find the square and adopt a joint text, which will in turn have to be approved by the European Parliament and then again by the Council. And this applies to many other pieces of the mosaic. Berlin, while defining the agreement as an "important" step for a "common and supportive" solution to migration management, speaks openly of "bitter morsels to swallow" and hopes that the trilogue can precisely "improve" the package, especially in terms of guarantees and human rights. The part concerning the possibility of transferring to third countries - as well as the inclusion of families with children in detention centres provided for the rapid procedure, the nature of which is not clear - is seen as smoke and mirrors by the Greens and there are those in Luxembourg who hypothesized possible "government crises" for Olaf Scholz. Italy will arrive at the trilogue with a loot to defend: the overcoming of the Dublin regulation.
Even in Rome they are aware that the text can be improved but, at the moment, the aim is first of all not to allow it to get worse. Then there will be the very difficult test of the European Chamber. The agreement received the endorsement of EPP leader Manfred Weber but the reaction of the Socialists was much more lukewarm. And among Dem MEPs there is open talk of a "disappointing deal". For Meloni then there is to overcome the obstacle of the allies of the Pis, the Polish government party that sits with FDI in the ECR group. At the moment, therefore, the risk of a sensational split is just around the corner. In short, nothing has been closed in Luxembourg, if anything something has been opened.
Those countries - including Italy but not only - that pushed for greater attention on the external dimension note how for the first time, with the EU projection fund given by solidarity, a clear link is created with the internal dimension. And if anything, there is still the European Council at the end of June to add other elements to the picture, such as action to combat illegal flows and aid to African countries. The final history of the Pact is practically to be written.
The EU finds the agreement on migrants, Italy decisive