Denmark’s Asylum Crackdown Yields 90% Drop in Applications, Standout Model in Europe
Denmark stands as a striking example of effective immigration policy, with its remarkable 90% drop in asylum applications. This achievement, supported by public immigration data, showcases a deliberate strategy built over years. The focus has been on discouraging economic migrants while reinforcing national unity. Such a comprehensive approach has garnered strong backing from the public and a rare political consensus across party lines, enabling the government to implement one of the most stringent asylum frameworks in Western Europe.
Commentator Will Cain recently highlighted the impact of Denmark’s policies in a widely circulated tweet, suggesting that the country has made itself “inhospitable for migrants and asylum seekers.” His observation underscores a growing sentiment among many that other Western nations should take heed. Without similar actions, he warns of the risk of increasing social discord and unsustainable immigration pressures.
This policy shift did not happen overnight. Over the last decade, both center-left and center-right administrations have gradually tightened the conditions governing asylum seekers. A staggering decline from 21,000 applications in 2015 to under 2,000 in 2023 illustrates just how effectively Denmark has reshaped its immigration landscape. In stark contrast, the UK has seen asylum claims nearly double during the same period, and France similarly grapples with rising numbers.
What distinguishes Denmark’s approach from those of its neighbors? First, the nation modified its definition of asylum, no longer providing refuge based solely on generalized threats in a home country. Now, claims require detailed individualization, with even successful applicants receiving only temporary permits. This shift represents a significant narrowing of who qualifies for asylum.
Second, entering the path to permanent residency has become intentionally arduous. The waiting period is now eight years, with stringent criteria for language skills, job attachment, and cultural integration. This lengthy process can stretch to a decade or more for full residency status. Such rigorous checks have contributed to a significant decline in the number of people viewing Denmark as a viable option for asylum.
Lastly, the government has deliberately transformed the accommodation experience into a deterrent. Asylum seekers are often placed in remote facilities, far from urban centers and job opportunities, limiting their ability to integrate into society. Additionally, a law passed in 2016 allows police to search for and seize belongings like jewelry from refugees if the value exceeds approximately $1,500. This measure, though not frequently enforced, sends a clear message: the Danish government will not provide a comfortable life for new arrivals without adequate justification.
Despite international criticism, the data now validate Denmark’s approach. The rate of migrants from Africa and the Middle East has decreased significantly, fewer asylum boats approach its shores, and incidents of human trafficking have ebbed. Furthermore, illegal border crossings have hit historic lows.
Denmark’s policies have resonated with neighboring countries. Both Finland and Sweden, once known for generous immigration policies, have altered course significantly. Sweden, which received over 160,000 asylum seekers in 2015, now accepts less than 10,000 annually. Finland has passed laws to reduce resettlement rates and enhanced border inspections since 2021.
By contrast, the UK and France have experienced a surge in asylum claims. British applications rose from approximately 29,000 in 2018 to more than 75,000 in 2023, while France reported that over 137,000 asylum seekers lodged claims that same year, nearly doubling since 2015.
Despite the British government’s efforts to create tough policies, including a stalled deportation plan to Rwanda, implementation has faltered. Reportedly, legal impediments and a lack of bipartisan support have hindered substantial reform. The challenges in France are similar, as the government struggles to manage the increasing volume of claims and address the growth of undocumented migrant camps in cities such as Paris and Calais.
Some critics argue that Denmark’s strict policies violate international obligations or incite racism. However, Danish lawmakers contend that these measures are essential for preserving public trust in the immigration system and safeguarding social services for lawful residents. “We want to ensure that Denmark remains a functioning welfare society,” emphasized Danish Immigration and Integration Minister Kaare Dybvad Bek last year. The underlying principle of maintaining control over borders is central to their argument.
The turn in Denmark’s immigration policy has been reinforced by the ruling Social Democrats, with wide support from both conservative and center-left parties aiming for a “zero asylum claims” target. While not a strict policy, this phrase reflects a rising consensus in political discourse, highlighting a commitment to reducing asylum admissions.
The improvements in Denmark are visible. Social spending has stabilized, crime statistics show fewer offenses linked to migrants, and labor participation rates among immigrants have seen positive changes. Denmark’s policies now serve as a point of reference in European discussions about “de-incentivized asylum systems.”
However, replicating this model in other countries remains uncertain. Denmark’s relatively small and homogenous population allows for quick enactment of immigration law changes. Its unique political consensus contrasts sharply with nations like France and Britain, where divisions run deep. Larger, more diverse states may struggle to implement similarly strict deterrent measures without backlash.
“You have to align the ambition with your national capacity and public will,” remarked a senior advisor to EU migration officials. Denmark has meticulously evaluated the kind of society it aims to preserve and structured its policies accordingly.
For those advocating reform in other countries, Denmark provides a valuable roadmap: stricter admission criteria, extended integration timelines, economic disincentives during asylum processing, and most critically, a unified political front advocating for enforcement.
Will Cain’s remarks resonate among those concerned about the current permissive systems in the West. “The West must save itself,” he cautioned. The question remains whether nations like the UK and France can manage their rising asylum numbers or if voters will continue to accept systems perceived as broken or exploited.
The statistics are striking. Denmark has successfully reduced asylum claims by 90% through methodical legal changes, showing that effective policy, not merely rhetoric, can yield meaningful results.
"*" indicates required fields
