Anti-migration politics of Italy - causes and consequences

Since the beginning of the 20th century, the migration flows have significantly changed European society. Immediately after the Second World War, refugees were treated as a problem from a militarily-strategic domain. It was only by the establishment of various international organizations and the adoption of common acts for their management that the problem of migration flows was transformed into an important international issue of a social and humanitarian nature. Since the '50s, so-called programs of "temporary worker" begun in Europe, which was, above all, characteristic of the immigration policies of Western and Northern Europe. During the '90s, there was a new flow of migrants coming to the countries of the old continent, such as Britain, Germany, France and the Netherlands, all as a result of wars and humanitarian crises outside and within the European continent. Even the traditional countries of emigration on the southern borders of the European Union, such as Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal, have gradually become new destinations for international migrants. It becomes clear that migrants and refugees are not a temporary and easily solved problem, but rather a reality with which many countries have to face, and the definition and application of legal frameworks for the description and control of migration become an issue of essential importance.
In the recent period, the intensification of migration flows produced so-called "European refugee crisis", as many asylum seekers and migrants from the Middle East and North Africa crossed the southern borders of Europe. A war in Syria and Libya has been identified as the key driver of this situation, and also long social instability in countries such as Afghanistan, Eritrea, and Iraq. However, some general factors have played a significant role in general migration events, such as economic and social inequalities, demographic changes, the expansion of global social networks, and environmental and climate change. The drastic rise in migration flows across the Mediterranean has actually been predicted several decades ago, as a result of population growth, low income and structural unemployment in various parts of the world. However, governments in Europe have turned out to be completely unprepared for resolving the humanitarian and political consequences of increased migration, which has caused debates on the unwanted consequences of the refugee crisis and ways how to stop it.
One of those examples is Italy. Due to its key geographic position in the Mediterranean, this country was mostly exposed to migration flows that were heading towards Europe, despite being largely involved in maritime rescue operations. Along with Greece and Spain, Italy is the main country of the first arrival for refugees who arrive in Europe by sea. An increasing number of migrants in Italy, as well as the inefficiency of the Italian authorities in trying to cope with migration flows and their transit, have caused a series of public debates about the effectiveness and sustainability of their own reception and integration policies. There is also a noticeable disagreement on the issue of cultural and religious diversity, as well as the cost of participation in coordinating and patrolling the Italian coast.
On the one hand, the Italian authorities have taken action to deal with the migration crisis in line with the current EU policy, which insisted on joint crisis management, while, on the other hand, radical-right political movements tried to determine the new situation and define the humanitarian crisis. The Italian case has shown that a single country by itself cannot cope with such crisis, which is not exclusively the result of a large number of refugees and migrants, but also a reflection of the inefficient measures taken by the Italian government.
The reason for this lies in the fact that the process of noticing and defining the phenomenon of immigration has happened quite late. No other European state in its history has had such a constant flow of the emigration over more than a century. In addition, Italy has vast experience in internal migration, or to be precise by the displacement of the population from the mostly agricultural south to the industrial north. This has led to the fact that the anti-immigration attitude of the public opinion is not predominantly due to the fear of the crime and terrorism, but above all because of the fear of the negative economic and social impact that migration can have on the society as a whole and the Italian economy.
In order to deal effectively with the problem of migration, the Italian government adopted a serie of legal acts and measures, but they were almost always criticized because they were seriously limiting the rights to asylum, as well as the protection of basic human rights. The last act of this kind was the Immigration and Security Decree of Minister of Interior Matteo Salvini, adopted on September 24, 2018. This decree abolished humanitarian protection, as well as the protection system for asylum seekers and refugees (SPRAR), and even introduced the possibility of abolishing citizenship for those persons found to be guilty of serious crimes or those ones related to terrorism. However, this decree does not apply to the Italians in general, but only to those citizens who have recently acquired Italian citizenship. In addition, to every asylum-seeker who is involved in criminal proceedings on the assumption that he is involved in a crime in any way connected with the security of the state, the process of recognizing asylum is blocked and he is forced to leave the state before the final decision of the court is made. This clearly violates Article 27 of the Italian Constitution, according to which "a defendant shall be considered not guilty until a final sentence has been passed". In the meantime, the Italian government has accused some NGOs that operate in the Mediterranean in order to save migrants’ life to work with smugglers and thus make significant profits.
The priority given to the general interests of society is rarely called into question - it predominates over the right to mobility, a search for a better future and the protection of human rights. This raises the question of whether and how much are the human lives worth in comparison to the protection of national borders and interests of a nation?!