‘Remigration’ a euphemism for forced transfer

Right-wing populists have perfected the use of language to conceal their true intentions, particularly when it comes to minorities and migrants. Although “remigration” — a euphemism for deporting migrants — is not new in academic circles, in recent years it has entered the discourse of the ultra-right across Europe and has gradually begun to creep into mainstream politics. Those who subscribe to this view are becoming increasingly bold in their insinuations against migrants and even in redefining who qualifies as a migrant.

Let us be clear. What motivates these groups is not the upholding of the law, a principle that unites most societies — they are seeking a culture war. If they cannot deport all those who do not fit their notion of who belongs and who does not, they at least seek to reduce their numbers substantially and force the rest to submit to what they perceive as a superior culture.

Across Europe, ethnonationalism and nativism have been promoted by right-wing parties such as Alternative for Germany, Reform UK, France’s National Rally and Hungary’s Fidesz, led by Prime Minister Viktor Orban. Parties and leaders once regarded as ultra-right, among them Marine Le Pen’s National Rally and Giorgia Meloni’s Brothers of Italy, are now being outflanked from the right by movements and parties that not long ago were widely considered immoral, illegitimate and, in some cases, illegal.

It is not only irregular migration that upsets them but migrants in general, with Muslims often their primary target

Yossi Mekelberg

Remigration is widely considered a direct, actionable offshoot and key policy component of the “Great Replacement.” This so-called theory has little to substantiate it; instead, it spreads a debunked conspiracy that alleges that left-wing politicians and a “globalist” elite are deliberately undermining birth rates in Western countries while encouraging nonwhite immigration in order to alter the demographic balance.

More than anything, it reflects a Pavlovian reaction among parts of the white majority in both the US and Europe who feel threatened by newcomers who do not speak, look or live like them. In many cases, it is ingrained racism in parts of their societies. The proponents of this ideology are not interested in integration but in assimilation — and preferably in transferring minorities out of Europe altogether.

Gradually, the mask is being removed from those on the margins of European politics. It is not only irregular migration that upsets them but migrants in general, with Muslims often serving as their primary target.

Martin Sellner, an Austrian, ironically, and the current leader of the Identitarian Movement of Austria, is most closely associated with developing the concept of remigration. In his book “Remigration: A Proposal,” he outlines an agenda targeting people who fall into three categories: illegal migrants, including asylum seekers; legal noncitizen migrants who hold residence permits or work visas; and, to remove any doubt about the ultimate objective, a category of “non-assimilated” migrants who have obtained citizenship but are suspected of “maintaining loyalty to foreign nations or radical religions.”

Sellner proposes the creation of a centralized “assimilation monitor” database that would determine who belongs and who does not. On that basis, decisions could be made to force even naturalized citizens to leave the country. Welcome (or rather unwelcome) back to European totalitarianism.

In recent years, these views and their proponents have been gaining popularity at a frightening pace, along with increasing political influence. While one might be tempted to dismiss figures of this kind as marginal, Sellner was recently hosted by state and federal parliamentarians from the far-right Alternative for Germany party in the eastern German states of Brandenburg and Thuringia, participating in panel debates, including one held in the Thuringian state parliament. Although Alternative for Germany’s branches in both states have been classified as right-wing extremist by German federal security authorities, the party still holds nearly a quarter of the seats in the Bundestag.

Nor is this phenomenon limited to Germany and Austria. Consider Reform UK, which is riding high in the polls and, as a result, becoming increasingly unabashed in its antimigrant rhetoric. The party has suggested that, if elected to government, it would abolish the right of migrants to qualify for permanent settlement in the UK after five years. Instead, all migrants — including those previously granted “indefinite leave to remain” — would be required to apply for renewable five-year visas, available only to those earning high salaries and meeting additional strict criteria.

These views and their proponents have been gaining popularity at a frightening pace, along with increasing political influence

Yossi Mekelberg

The stated intention is clear: to force many people who currently have permanent residency to leave the UK because they would not meet the new requirements. Since this proposal would not apply to those with settled status under the EU Settlement Scheme, it appears to target specific communities.

If this were not enough, Reform has also pledged to ban the conversion of churches into mosques. There are about 38,500 churches in the UK. Over recent decades, approximately 8,500 have been closed. However, figures show that, over the past 50 years, only 41 former churches have been converted into mosques. Yet, in the culture war Reform’s leaders seek to wage — portraying themselves as defenders of the Christian faith against Islam — facts matter very little.

What Nigel Farage and others like him seem not to consider in their quest for power and headlines is the immediate impact of this xenophobic rhetoric on minority communities. It fuels antimigrant sentiment and contributes to a climate of hostility. Hate crime in England and Wales is reportedly on the rise, with more than 115,000 cases recorded last year — a 2 percent increase over the previous 12 months.

The rise of Reform is particularly worrying because the party leads in the polls. Whether or not it wins the next general election, its popularity demonstrates that this ideology and language are gaining traction among a significant segment of British society.

There is mounting evidence that the remigration movement and its ideology are not a passing trend. It cannot be treated with complacency, especially in Europe, given its not-so-distant past. History has taught us that the road from repugnant ideology and hateful rhetoric to implementation can be far shorter and far more brutal than we might wish to believe human beings are capable of.

• Yossi Mekelberg is professor of international relations and an associate fellow of the MENA Program at Chatham House. X: @YMekelberg