Migration Politics, Pressure and the Rise of Far-Right

In several Western countries, rising public anxieties about irregular migration, combined with economic uncertainty and perceptions of weakened national control, have coincided with rising support for far-right political movements that frame migration as a core threat to national stability.

This dynamic has placed mounting pressure on governments to adopt more restrictive migration measures, with significant implications for peacefulness and public trust.

Far-right parties topping polls in France, Germany, UK and Italy share the strategy of harnessing migration fears tied to economics. France’s National Rally (RN) hit over 30 per cent support, criticising “open doors” on migration. Germany’s AfD, Netherlands’ PVV, and others promise mass deportations amid economic anxiety.

Across many advanced economies, political debates over migration have become increasingly central to national politics, shaping electoral dynamics, public policy priorities and perceptions of social cohesion. The 42% decline in French residence permits in the first nine months of 2025 follows restrictions on migration in other European countries, while the US administration has curbed pathways to enter the US and is pushing for an end to birthright citizenship.

While migration is often framed as a security issue in public debate, evidence from the Global Peace Index (GPI) 2025 and Global Terrorism Index (GTI) 2025 suggests that the primary drivers of public pressure to restrict migration are economic and structural rather than security-based. Housing shortages, rising living costs and pressure on public services consistently emerge as the dominant sources of public concern, with fears of terrorism or violent extremism playing a secondary, amplifying role.

The GPI finds that declines in peacefulness across Western democracies are most strongly associated with political polarisation, economic inequality and weakening trust in institutions. In this context, migration becomes a highly visible focal point for broader anxieties, particularly when rapid population growth coincides with structural housing undersupply and rising costs of living.

In many major cities, housing affordability has deteriorated sharply since 2020, and migration is frequently perceived as intensifying competition for limited housing, infrastructure and services.

In France, while the policy shift occurred amid rising support for far-right parties, reporting indicates that housing shortages, public service strain and concerns over the pace of population growth were central to the political calculus. Similar dynamics have been observed in Germany and the UK, where tighter border controls and asylum restrictions have been introduced against a backdrop of acute housing stress and infrastructure constraints.

Far-right political movements have been particularly effective at linking migration to both economic and security anxieties. By framing migration as an external threat to jobs, housing, identity and safety, these groups are able to simplify complex structural problems into emotionally resonant narratives. This dynamic places mainstream governments under pressure to demonstrate control, often through headline migration caps or visa reductions, even when internal policy assessments identify housing supply and service capacity as the binding constraints.

Evidence from Positive Peace research suggests that such responses carry long-term risks. Policies driven primarily by short-term political pressure, rather than by investments in housing supply, infrastructure and integration, can deepen social divisions and weaken institutional trust. Over time, this erodes the very resilience that allows societies to manage demographic change peacefully.

Fear of extremism functions less as a root cause of migration pressure and more as a narrative accelerant, reinforcing demands for restrictive policies that are primarily driven by economic and governance challenges.

The GTI provides important context for claims that migration restrictions are necessary to reduce terrorism risk. The GTI data shows no consistent relationship between higher migration levels and increased terrorism in Western countries. The vast majority of terrorist attacks in these states are carried out by domestically radicalised individuals rather than recent migrants, and in recent years far-right extremism has accounted for a growing share of incidents.

Fear of extremism therefore plays a limited role in shaping actual risk, even as it exerts disproportionate influence over political narratives. Yet security concerns remain politically potent. Terrorism is rare but highly salient, and isolated incidents can have an outsized impact on public opinion, particularly when amplified through polarised media environments or election-driven rhetoric.

As migration continues to shape political debate across Western democracies, the challenge facing governments is not simply one of border management, but of addressing the underlying economic and social pressures that fuel public anxiety.

The data from the GPI and GTI consistently points to the same conclusion: sustainable peace is best supported not through securitisation or exclusion, but through inclusive governance, effective planning and credible institutions capable of managing change fairly.