Meloni claims credit for the EU Pact as six countries announce returns to Italy

The story that the morning press did not tell is the stance with which the Italian government is trying to manage, on the communication front, a mechanism that in terms of numbers is moving in the opposite direction from its stated goals.

On August 21, in a Facebook post, Giorgia Meloni described the new European Union Pact on migration and asylum as a “positive turning point” for Italy in managing the so-called “Dublinanti” — asylum seekers who, having arrived in a country of first entry, then apply elsewhere and can be sent back. In the same post the Prime Minister argues that the strengthening of the Safe Third Country principle, pushed for by Italy, will make accelerated repatriations easier (LaPresse).

The point of contention

The reply is aimed at Elly Schlein, who had spoken of a boomerang effect and of a government failure. Meloni responded by separating two matters:

“Schengen and the Pact on Migration and Asylum are two completely different things” — Giorgia Meloni, Prime Minister

The distinction is technically sound — internal freedom of movement and the rules on examining asylum applications belong to different regulatory bodies — and at the same time politically selective, since the opposition’s challenge concerns the practical outcome: how many asylum seekers Italy receives back.

On that outcome the picture is documented. According to LaPresse’s reconstruction, the new Pact is allowing Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Finland, Sweden and the Netherlands to transfer first-entry asylum seekers to Italy. The Netherlands is the latest to have announced it, on August 21: it will send back to Italy migrants who arrived after June 12 (Napoli Magazine). On the opposite side, the Hungarian government has stated it does not intend to accept any transfers (Domani).

The Dublin Regulation assigns the examination of the application to the country of first entry: this is the rule that makes Italy a recipient of returns rather than a sender. The advantage claimed by the government concerns another link in the chain — the possibility of repatriating more quickly to third countries deemed safe — and the two effects coexist without automatically offsetting each other.

The American chapter

On the same day Meloni returned to the subject of her relationship with Donald Trump in an interview with the New York Times, picked up by Sky TG24 and by Il Tempo. The Prime Minister said she had believed things would be simpler, given the convergence between the two governments on immigration and cultural battles. The cooling, according to the interview, also stemmed from the use of American bases in Italy during the war with Iran.

It is the most explicit admission of a bilateral difficulty that the government had until now handled with more neutral formulas. It is worth noting its scope, however: this is a subjective assessment given in an interview, not an act or a document. The available record contains no indications of formalized American requests nor of consequent Italian decisions.

What is missing

At present, the figures for transfers actually carried out to Italy by the six countries that have announced them are not public: the announcements are political decisions, while implementation goes through individual procedures and transfer deadlines. Until that data emerges, the dispute between the government and the opposition remains a confrontation between two readings of the same rule.

On August 21 Meloni was in Taranto for the opening of the Mediterranean Games, where she met Lebanese President Joseph Aoun.