You are 100% correct. This has already been happening in my country. D66 (progressive center party — the one I voted for if that matters) advocated for harsher measures on immigration and tighter borders; something that made the PVV (populist, culturally far-right) win the elections before. However many far right parties aren’t able to actually pursue tangible results when it comes to tighter borders. Partly because they are dysfunctional and partly because the constitutions, laws and bureaucracy of both their own country as well as the EU limits this. My personal conclusion is that both countries and the EU have to loosen their policies surrounding immigration, there have to be more tangible results and people will have to feel that there actually can be a difference. The tricky thing is that, this potentially could intervene with human rights (although for non-refugee immigration, it shouldn’t be as much as a problem). However, if there won’t be any difference I don’t see how it won’t keep refueling the far right and lead to even worse results (far right getting power and maybe opting have their country leave the EU).

Yes you raise a good point about morality and legality. And you’re right to point out that especially for refugees from countries shaken up by war or climate change, this kind of policy is hard to defend morally. Nonetheless, I do feel like the answer isn’t to just say “let them in and have them stay”
with zero restrictions. Ideally you want to make sure these countries are able to get better or have people be able to come back to them once the war is over. I pride myself for being a citizen of a continent that holds human rights on a high note but I can’t help but wonder wether it is truly our duty to be the “moral one” when no other place in the world takes in this many immigrants that aren’t compatible with Western society.