This week, Germany’s far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) won nearly 44 percent of the vote in Saxony-Anhalt, more than twice the Christian Democrats’ share and the AfD’s strongest state-election result. Anti-immigration sentiment and nationalism helped drive the campaign.
I first visited Germany in 1986 and have returned many times. Career-related assignments have repeatedly taken me to the Netherlands and Austria as well. Through four decades of travel and conversations with ordinary Europeans, I have noticed a marked change since 2016. Over the past decade, concerns about immigration have surfaced more frequently, not only in Germany but across Europe.
In recent conversations with voters registered with both American political parties and, most recently, with citizens in France, I also heard statements connecting immigration to worries about economic insecurity, rapid cultural change, political instability, and artificial intelligence’s effect on employment.
These conversations are not a scientific survey, but they reflect a broader reality: immigration has become intertwined with anxieties about security, identity, and the future. Democratic societies must manage borders and maintain public confidence while protecting human dignity and fostering belonging.
Political movements sometimes exploit legitimate policy failures by turning immigrants into scapegoats. Those who value immigration should not dismiss concerns about uncontrolled borders, while those who favor stronger enforcement should not portray entire immigrant communities as threats. Immigrants, in turn, have a responsibility to integrate into the civic life of their adopted country, learning its principal language, respecting its laws, and participating in the wider community without abandoning their heritage.
A serious debate requires holding several truths at once.
What Recent Elections and Events Tell Us
There are similar trends elsewhere.
The political transformation is equally striking in West Bengal, India, where I was born. In May 2026, the Bharatiya Janata Party won 207 of 294 Assembly seats, ending 15 years of Trinamool Congress rule, an outcome many Bengalis once considered nearly impossible. Border security and unauthorized migration from Bangladesh played a key part in the campaign, in addition to governance and corruption.
Spain offers a different lesson. In July 2026, approximately 72,000 people crossed from Morocco into Ceuta, overwhelming local facilities and fueling demands for stronger borders; at least 90 people died, and 5,000 to 10,000 of the migrants remained in Spain weeks later. Yet Spain was not uniformly anti-immigrant: earlier that year, it created a pathway to residency and work authorization for roughly 500,000 qualifying undocumented residents.
In South Africa, frustration over unemployment and unauthorized migration has fueled anti-migrant vigilantism, including efforts to deny foreigners access to public health facilities. The government condemned the violence while acknowledging concerns about illegal immigration.
These incidents differ, but each shows how immigration failures can erode trust and social stability.
Border Control and Legal Pathways Are Not Opposites
Governments must combine enforcement with due process and legitimate asylum protections. In 2023, lawful-entry programs for eligible Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans paired with stronger enforcement sharply reduced US Border Patrol encounters involving those groups. Effective policy must also distinguish among unlawful entry, visa overstays, asylum claims, and long-term undocumented residence.
Correcting False Narratives About Immigrants
Enforcing immigration laws does not require accepting false claims about immigrants. A peer-reviewed Texas study found substantially lower felony arrest rates among undocumented immigrants than native-born citizens, challenging blanket claims linking immigration to crime.
Undocumented immigrants also work in essential industries and pay federal, state, and local taxes. Large-scale deportation would carry economic as well as enforcement costs. Immigration policy should be based on evidence and individual conduct—not fear of entire communities.
The Responsibilities That Accompany Belonging
Integration is a shared responsibility: receiving societies must create pathways to belonging, while immigrants must participate in civic life. That said, as I wrote in India Currents, integration does not require abandoning one’s heritage.
Integration means learning the principal language of one’s adopted country, respecting its laws and customs, contributing to local institutions, and building relationships across differences. Immigrants should preserve their culture, but professional success alone does not create belonging. Belonging grows through participation, contribution, and commitment to the surrounding society.
Immigrants should be free to preserve and share their heritage. At the same time, living only within ethnic, linguistic, or religious enclaves can limit the relationships through which mutual understanding develops.
A More Honest Conversation
Immigration debates are often trapped between two extremes: treating every concern about borders as prejudice or every immigrant as a threat.
Neither reflects the evidence.
Democracies can secure their borders while providing legal pathways and fair asylum decisions. Integration also requires effort from both sides: receiving countries must offer a path to belonging, while immigrants must participate in civic life without being forced to surrender their heritage.
We don’t have to choose between secure borders and human dignity. We can maintain both and build a shared future.
Neil Ghosh is an author, speaker, and bridge builder. He writes the Building Bridges column for Patheos, exploring empathy, purpose, civic life, and the small l actions that can bridge divides and strengthen communities. Neil is the author of Do More Good, featuring a foreword by His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Learn more at neilghosh.org.
