In recent years the concept of remigration has increasingly entered the political debate across Europe. The term has been widely discussed particularly in the German-speaking world and has been popularised by the Austrian activist Martin Sellner in his book Remigration: A Proposal. The idea behind this theory is that Europe should respond to its migration challenges through large-scale returns of migrants to their countries of origin. In some interpretations the proposal goes beyond irregular migrants or individuals involved in criminal activity and may also include people considered insufficiently integrated into European societies.
For readers in the United Kingdom, the emergence of this debate may seem surprising or unfamiliar. However, the growing discussion around remigration is not the starting point of the European migration crisis. Rather, it is the result of structural weaknesses in the way migration has been managed across Europe during the past several decades.
European countries have built complex legal and administrative systems governing migration. These systems regulate asylum procedures, residence permits, family reunification and various pathways to regularisation. Yet political attention has often focused primarily on how migrants enter and obtain legal status, while much less clarity has been given to another crucial question: how integration into the host society should actually occur.
Over time this imbalance has produced visible consequences. In several European countries, part of the immigrant population has lived for many years without fully integrating into the labour market, the linguistic environment or the broader social life of the country. When integration policies remain vague or inconsistent, immigration gradually begins to be perceived not as a controlled and managed process but as a phenomenon that institutions struggle to govern effectively.
It is within this context that more radical political proposals emerge. The theory of remigration reflects the frustration of those who believe that integration policies have failed and that the only possible response is to reverse the social and demographic consequences of immigration through organised returns.
However, such proposals raise complex legal and social questions. Many migrants across Europe have lived in their host countries for decades. They work, contribute to the economy and have built families. In many cases their children have been born and educated in European societies. The idea that the effects of several decades of migration could be resolved through large-scale returns therefore overlooks the reality of deeply established social structures.
The debate around remigration therefore reveals a deeper issue: Europe has never clearly defined what integration should mean in practical and policy terms. Integration has often been presented as a political aspiration rather than as a clearly structured and measurable component of migration policy.
It is precisely at this point that the paradigm “Integrazione o ReImmigrazione” becomes relevant.
The term ReImmigrazione is not an English concept but an Italian one, developed as a framework for governing migration. It refers to an approach in which the right to remain in a country is closely connected to a genuine process of integration within the host society.
Integration, in this perspective, cannot remain a vague expectation. It must be visible in concrete realities such as participation in economic life, the acquisition of the national language and respect for the legal and civic framework of the country. When these elements are present, immigration becomes a stable component of social and economic development.
When they are absent over a long period of time, however, migration policy cannot simply accept the indefinite persistence of social marginalisation.
In this context, ReImmigrazione does not refer to mass deportations or ideological attempts at demographic restructuring. Rather, it describes a governance mechanism within a broader migration policy framework that may become relevant when integration does not occur.
The essential difference from the theory of remigration lies in the logic of the approach. Remigration emerges as a reaction to a crisis that has already taken shape. The paradigm “Integrazione o ReImmigrazione”, by contrast, seeks to prevent such crises by establishing from the outset a clear relationship between integration and the right to remain.
For a British audience, this discussion echoes long-standing debates within the United Kingdom about integration, social cohesion and the role of migration policy in maintaining the stability of democratic societies. The European experience suggests that migration cannot be governed solely through border control or humanitarian frameworks. It must also address the long-term integration of migrants within the institutional and social fabric of the country.
The current debate on remigration therefore signals a broader moment of reflection within Europe. Societies are increasingly recognising that migration policy requires a clearer structure linking immigration, integration and long-term residence.
The paradigm “Integrazione o ReImmigrazione” proposes precisely such a structure. It suggests that integration should no longer be treated as an abstract aspiration but as a concrete condition capable of sustaining social cohesion and the long-term stability of European societies.
Avv. Fabio Loscerbo
Lawyer – Lobbyist registered in the European Union Transparency Register
ID: 280782895721-36
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-7030-0428
Lascia un commento