Tag
Roughly one in three people in Germany has a migration background. At the decision-making table the share falls to one in eight in the Bundestag and below three per cent among mayors of large cities. Still, 2026 marked a symbolic threshold. Cem Özdemir became the first state premier with a migration background, and in Berlin Elif Eralp is close to the same office.
For many, studying in Germany or the Netherlands is also the first step towards a permanent life there. Visa requirements, the blocked account and the right to look for work after graduation determine how this path works.
Finding a job and moving is the most direct route to Europe. Germany’s Opportunity Card and the EU Blue Card, and the Netherlands’ “kennismigrant” scheme, open this route in different ways.
Once the asylum decision is made, the real process begins: language courses, school, work and building ties with society. For those who are rejected, it is life in a legal gap. The final part of the series looks at what comes after the decision.
An asylum decision comes in one of three forms: recognition, subsidiary protection or rejection. After a rejection, appeal deadlines range from a few days to a few weeks, and missing a single day can mean losing your rights.
The fate of an asylum application is largely decided in the interview. What is asked from the preliminary interview through to the main interview, how credibility is assessed and the most common mistakes.
The asylum process begins with a single sentence spoken at the border or to an official authority. Lodging the application, biometric registration, the Dublin rules and safe-country lists shape the course of the first weeks.
The rules are shared, but practice differs from country to country. Waiting times, recognition rates, family reunification and reception conditions in Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and France, compared.
For thirty years Germany has been one of the European countries receiving the most asylum applications. In 2025, under the new government’s tough measures, applications halved and family reunification for people with subsidiary protection was suspended.
After the school attack in Kahramanmaraş, people spoke of “Americanisation”. Yet similar tragedies have happened in Europe too, from Finland to Austria; the common mechanism is often a licensed gun at home.
Knowing which institution takes the decisions is half the battle in the migration process. BAMF and the foreigners’ authorities in Germany, the IND, COA and municipalities in the Netherlands, the Presidency of Migration Management in Turkey: who is responsible for what?
Explaining the rise of the far right in Germany through politics alone falls short. The issue lies in the fear of people who feel forgotten. The author argues that the answer lies not in fear but in confidence.
For a long time Germany did not define itself as a country of immigration, but its laws said otherwise. The basic rules on work, study, family reunification and permanent residence in Germany’s Residence Act and in Dutch migration law.
In Europe deaths outnumber births; it is migration that keeps the population going. Contrary to populist rhetoric, the figures for Germany and the Netherlands show how dependent these countries are on migration.
One in every thirty people in the world is a migrant; forced displacement fell in 2025 for the first time in a decade but still stands at nearly 118 million. Europe is at the centre of this movement: first residence permits issued by the EU reached a ten-year high in 2023.
Topics
Latest articles
