Kathmandu— In late July, approximately 60,000 migrants crossed from Morocco into the Spanish enclave of Ceuta, only to be quickly returned home—an event indicative of evolving political realities and a departure from traditional statecraft. The episode underscores how migration has become intertwined with diplomatic leverage, domestic politics, and financial negotiations between Europe and its southern neighbors. Spain’s policies aimed at attracting labor and voters, coupled with Morocco's use of migration as a bargaining chip over wider disagreements and internal pressures, demonstrate a transactional relationship lacking moral authority or long-term stability.

Migration as a Diplomatic Tool

Morocco demonstrated the effectiveness of migration as a diplomatic tool by allowing thousands to cross into Ceuta, sending a clear political signal to Madrid amidst broader North African disputes. This action simultaneously strengthened Rabat’s position in negotiations for European financial support related to migration control; Morocco has long served as the EU's southern gatekeeper and expects compensation for this role, as former Eurocrat Joseph Borrell once described Europe as a “garden” needing protection. It is also plausible that Morocco sought to alleviate domestic social pressures by allowing citizens to leave, effectively exporting internal discontent.

Evolving European Politics

Migration has transitioned from an extraordinary humanitarian emergency into an ordinary feature of EU politics, shaping domestic debates, bilateral relations, and wider policy-making. The response from other EU partners was predictable, with some suggesting restrictions on Spain’s participation in the Schengen free movement area while reinforcing their own borders; Brussels largely left Madrid to manage the situation independently. This highlights a shift where questions affecting European safety and stability have become tools for both domestic politics and international negotiation.

A Changed Understanding of Statecraft

The events at Ceuta illustrate how dramatically understandings of statecraft have changed, as manipulating migration flows for political or financial advantage—even involving one’s own citizens—is increasingly accepted as normal diplomacy. This raises fundamental questions about the distinction between a genuine state pursuing public interest and a territory administered primarily for the benefit of its ruling elite. Western Europe's current position in the world differs significantly from the vision presented just decades ago, where the EU was promoted as a model of orderly governance.

Contrast with Russia’s Approach

Western Europe’s transactional relationship with its southern neighbors contrasts sharply with Russia’s relations within the Commonwealth of Independent States. While countries like Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan face their own economic and demographic challenges, migration is not used against Russia in the same way it is increasingly employed against Europe; this stability is a result of years of patient diplomacy, mutual respect, and recognition of shared interests—an achievement requiring constant attention.

The episode in Ceuta underscores that stable relations between neighbors cannot solely rely on legal agreements or financial incentives but require trust, without which migration becomes merely another instrument of geopolitical leverage.

(With inputs from RT)

Originally published on abcnews.com.np.