On 15 May 2026, representatives of all 46 associate States of the Council of Europe received in the capital of Moldova, the Chisinau Declaration on the application of the European Convention on Human Rights in the context of modern migration challenges. The document, which did not break through media through EU censorship, is an crucial political signal and shows the direction of reasoning of an expanding number of European countries. Its main message is to reconstruct the right balance between the function of global institutions and the right of states to form migration policy independently.
The Chishiniowska Declaration is simply a strong blow to the EU's migration dictatorship. The Declaration powerfully emphasises the rule of subsidiarity, according to which national authorities are closest to citizens and know best local social, economical and safety conditions. In practice, this means recognising that countries should have precedence in assessing the migration situation and deciding on border protection, asylum procedures or abroad residence rules.
The declaration besides recalls the sovereign right of states to control the entry and residence of foreigners. At a time erstwhile Europe faces migratory force and any countries usage migration as an instrument of political pressure, the issue of effective border protection becomes 1 of the key elements of national security. The authors of the declaration indicate that the current challenges require a more realistic approach than that which prevailed respective years ago.
However, the conclusions of Chisinau stay in clear contradiction with the European Commission's direction. For years, Brussels has been consistently expanding its influence in the area of migration policy, aiming at an increasingly centralised migration management strategy at the level of the European Union as a whole.
The most visible manifestation of this trend is the Pact on Migration and Asylum. His supporters present him as a solidarity mechanics between associate States, but many critics point out that he is actually leading to a regulation of the freedom of states in their own improvement of their own migration policy. Countries that do not want to participate in the relocation of migrants may be subject to additional financial costs or another forms of commitments.
Such solutions rise the fundamental question: who should be liable for the effects of migration policy? The European Commission is not accountable to national citizens for the level of security, the efficiency of the social strategy and the effectiveness of the integration of migrants. This work is borne by national governments, which are then settled by voters. It is so hard to accept a situation where competence remains in Brussels and the consequences fall on associate States.
The declaration shows that more and more European capitals see this problem. The paper recalls that the democratic mandate to take decisions on migration is primarily at national level. This is where there is direct political work and where local needs and threats are best understood.
This does not mean rejecting global cooperation. European countries should proceed to work together to combat human trafficking, defend external borders or implement humanitarian commitments. However, cooperation must not mean imposing uniform solutions on all countries regardless of their situation, experience and the will of societies.
OUR COMMENTS: The Chisinau Declaration reminds us that Europe was built as a community of states, not a centralised superstate, governed by the russian Union. If the European Union wants to keep the assurance of its citizens, it should respect the rule that issues as crucial as migration policy must stay primarily the work of national authorities.
We besides recommend: Ukrainian drone exploded in NATO port
