The Conflict of the 2015 European Migration Crisis A Multi-Level Analysis in Austria and Hungary [védés előtt]

Abstract

The 2015 European migration crisis marked a significant turning point in contemporary European politics, highlighting widespread societal and political tensions across the continent. The unprecedented influx of refugees and migrants, particularly from the Middle East and North Africa, posed complex challenges for European states, both in terms of governance and public perception. This crisis generated immediate humanitarian and political responses and may have reshaped long-term political discourse, electoral dynamics, and social attitudes toward migration. As a consequence of the intense migratory pressure, the crisis led to profound societal and political conflicts, as migration became a highly polarising issue, influencing party politics, policy-making, and public debates. The extent and nature of these conflicts varied across countries, reflecting differences in historical, economic, and political contexts. This divergence highlights the dual nature of immigration, presenting it both as an economic and cultural opportunity and as a security and identity challenge. While some political parties pursued policies of openness and humanitarian support, others prioritised border protection and national sovereignty, contributing to a fragmented European response. To analyse political and social conflicts, cleavage theories serve as one of the most prominent theoretical frameworks. The traditional approach (e.g. Lipset & Rokkan, 1967) argues that party choice and party strategies are primarily shaped by socio-demographic factors, which determine voters' position on public policy issues ('bottom up' causality direction). In contrast, the revisionist perspective (e.g. Lijphart, 1984) suggests that political parties shape voters' value preferences through their strategies, and these value preferences influence both party affiliation and positions on public policy issues ('top-down' causality direction). In parallel, the new revisionist approach extends the framework of cleavage theories by highlighting the significance of the normative level, which includes both normative identities and value preferences. According to the theorists of this perspective, the normative level serves as a mediating level between voters' socio-demographic factors and political parties' strategies (Bartolini & Mair, 1990; Deegan‐Krause, 2009). As the migration-related political conflict has intensified and persisted, it is crucial to examine whether the conflicts arising from the migration crisis can be classified as a cleavage-level conflict. If this hypothesis is confirmed, which existing patterns of political and social divisions align with it? Conversely, if the conflict cannot be qualified as a cleavage-level conflict, the study aims to identify alternative forms of political and social conflict to understand better how migration-related conflicts interact with existing social and institutional structures. To address these questions, the research employs a three-level analytical model, examining the voter, normative, and party levels. The study focuses on Hungary, while Austria serves as a reference country for comparative purposes. In terms of methodological aspects, the research analyses political parties' position toward immigration based on their party manifestos (Manifesto Project Database - MPD) and rhetoric (Chapel Hill Expert Survey – CHES) by crosstabulation and correlation analysis. The model employs voter-level analysis using European Social Survey (ESS) data and multi-level regression analysis to examine attitudes toward migration. Because of the data availability, the time frame varies by level of analysis: party-level analysis covers the period from 2014 to 2018, capturing shifts in party positions before and after the migration crisis, while voter-level analysis examines the period between 2002 and 2018 to assess long-term attitudinal changes. Thus, the analysis can be classified as a time-series cross-sectional (TSCS; Gerring, 2004). The analysis begins with an empirical overview of the 2015 European migration crisis, using statistical data to illustrate the scale and the impact of the crisis. Then, the research focuses on cleavage theories, outlining the traditional, the revisionist and the new revisionist perspectives, followed by an examination of cleavages in Austria and Hungary. Subsequently, the study investigates the country-specific impact of immigration and the public perceptions of immigration. Finally, the analysis focuses on political parties' positions and voters' attitudes toward immigration, considering their ideological alignment. The research seeks to contribute to the broader understanding of migration-related conflicts and their potential role in shaping contemporary political conflicts.