Introduction

Migration has become one of the defining policy challenges at both global and regional level, shaped by the interaction of conflict, governance failures, economic disparities, and increasingly complex security dynamics. Contemporary migration patterns reflect not only traditional push and pull factors, but also the impact of protracted conflicts, fragile institutions, and hybrid pressures that transcend national borders. As a result, migration is no longer a purely socio-economic phenomenon, but a multidimensional issue with direct implications for security and governance.

Within this broader context, the Black Sea region has emerged as a particularly sensitive space. Located at the strategic junction of the European Union, Eastern Partnership countries, the Western Balkans, and active or protracted conflict theatres, the region illustrates how global migration drivers intersect with regional security and governance challenges. Its proximity to the EU, combined with ongoing instability and geopolitical competition, makes migration dynamics in this area especially relevant for European policymakers.

For the European Union, understanding the drivers of migration in this neighbourhood is not solely a matter of external relations. It has direct implications for internal security, border management, and the credibility of the EU’s external action. Conflict, fragile state structures, and hybrid threats, ranging from disinformation to the instrumentalisation of migration, generate complex movement patterns that place sustained pressure on national administrations and EU-level frameworks.

Based on these premises, this paper examines the main drivers of migration through the lens of the Black Sea region, across three interlinked dimensions: the security and conflict nexus; governance capacity and institutional resilience; and EU-level cooperation mechanisms, including digital systems and joint operational initiatives. The analysis is informed by practical experience with EU-level training, operational cooperation, and the implementation of large-scale IT systems in the Justice and Home Affairs domain. The central argument is that effective migration management depends not on isolated policy measures, but on coordinated governance, shared systems, and continuous investment in institutional capacity.

Conflict, Instability, and Hybrid Pressures as Migration Drivers

Armed conflict and political instability remain among the primary drivers of forced migration globally, with particularly acute effects in the wider Black Sea region. The ongoing war in Ukraine has generated one of the largest displacement crises in Europe since the Second World War, with direct and indirect consequences felt in neighbouring countries such as Moldova and Romania, as well as across the European Union. Beyond immediate displacement, the conflict has disrupted labour markets, supply chains, and energy security, contributing to longer-term migratory movements driven by uncertainty and declining socio-economic prospects.

In parallel, unresolved or so-called “frozen” conflicts in the region continue to undermine stability and governance. These environments weaken public institutions, constrain economic development, and erode public trust. In such contexts, migration is often not the result of a sudden crisis, but of a gradual deterioration of living conditions and future opportunities.

Hybrid pressures further complicate these dynamics. The deliberate manipulation of migration flows for political purposes, the use of disinformation targeting migrant communities, and the framing of migration as a tool of strategic pressure blur the line between humanitarian movement and security risk. These practices place additional strain on border management and asylum systems and increase the complexity of policy responses.

Recent EU-level risk assessments underline that migratory flows along the eastern borders have, in certain contexts, been deliberately influenced in response to geopolitical developments. This instrumentalisation of migration amplifies existing pressures on border management systems and reinforces the need to address migration as part of a broader security and governance framework rather than as an isolated policy field.

As a result, migration in the Black Sea region must be understood within a wider geopolitical context, shaped not only by local drivers but also by external actors seeking to influence EU policies and internal cohesion.

Governance Gaps and Institutional Capacity

While security dynamics define the broader environment in which migration occurs, governance capacity determines how migration pressures translate into actual movements and outcomes. In many Black Sea and Eastern Partnership countries, fragmented institutional arrangements, limited administrative resources, and uneven implementation of migration and asylum policies remain significant challenges.

Insufficient coordination between border authorities, asylum services, law enforcement, and judicial institutions creates gaps that are exploited by smuggling networks and irregular migration routes. At the same time, weak data-sharing mechanisms and limited analytical capacity reduce the ability of national authorities to anticipate trends and respond in a timely and coherent manner.

EU-wide assessments have highlighted that uneven preparedness and administrative capacity continue to represent a structural vulnerability in the overall migration management system. Strategic planning, early warning mechanisms, and coordinated policy cycles are increasingly essential, particularly for regions exposed to sudden displacement shocks, such as the Black Sea area.

These challenges are not solely technical. Effective migration governance requires clear mandates, inter-agency cooperation, and sustained professional training. Where these elements are lacking, responses tend to be reactive rather than strategic.

For the EU, governance gaps in neighbouring countries have direct consequences. They affect the integrity of the EU’s external borders, the functioning of the Common European Asylum System, and mutual trust between Member States and partner countries. Addressing migration pressures therefore requires a focus on institutional resilience, legal alignment, and administrative capacity, rather than a narrow emphasis on border control alone.

The Role of Interoperability and Digital Border Management

Digital border and information systems play a central role in monitoring and managing migration in the EU and its neighbourhood. Systems such as the Schengen Information System (SIS), Eurodac, the Entry/Exit System (EES), and ETIAS contribute to situational awareness, identity management, and risk assessment across Member States.

Interoperability between these systems enhances the ability of authorities to identify travel histories, detect secondary movements, and support operational decision-making in real time. From a governance perspective, this reduces fragmentation and promotes a more consistent application of rules across national administrations.

However, the effectiveness of interoperability depends less on technology itself and more on governance conditions. Data quality, clearly defined workflows, trained end users, and coordination between national authorities and EU agencies are essential. Where these elements are insufficient, systems risk being underused or applied inconsistently, limiting their strategic value.

Recent Council-level discussions on the implementation of interoperability underline that phased roll-outs and delays in the entry into operation of large-scale systems increase the importance of interim coordination measures, training efforts, and shared operational planning at both EU and national level.

Engagement with partner countries in the Black Sea region is equally important. Although access to EU systems is restricted, convergence on standards, procedures, and data protection principles supports trust and operational cooperation. Such alignment improves early detection of migration trends and strengthens the EU’s overall preparedness.

Lessons from EU–Moldova Cooperation and CSDP Engagement

EU–Moldova cooperation provides relevant insights into how governance and capacity-building can mitigate migration pressures in a sensitive regional context. Moldova’s geographic position and exposure to regional instability have placed sustained demands on its administrative structures. EU support has therefore focused not only on border management, but also on asylum reform, institutional coordination, and professional development.

In practical terms, targeted training and advisory support have contributed to improved cooperation between border authorities and asylum services. Joint exercises and mentoring activities have helped clarify institutional roles, strengthen information exchange, and enhance crisis response procedures during periods of increased migratory pressure.

CSDP missions and EU-funded programmes in the region further highlight the importance of long-term engagement and local ownership. The combination of training, mentoring, and quality assurance has reinforced institutional resilience and indirectly supported more effective migration management.

A key lesson is the need for clearly defined roles among EU agencies, Member States, and partner institutions. Fragmented approaches reduce impact, while coordinated efforts that integrate operational support, policy dialogue, and capacity-building produce more sustainable results.

Policy Implications and Conclusions

Migration is driven by a complex interaction of security and governance factors, including conflict, fragile state structures, hybrid pressures, and institutional weaknesses. The Black Sea region illustrates how these drivers intersect and generate migration flows that directly affect the European Union.

Addressing these challenges requires an integrated EU approach that links security analysis, effective governance, and digital capabilities. Large-scale IT systems and interoperability are essential tools, but their effectiveness depends on institutional readiness, professional expertise, and sustained cooperation with partner countries.

Strengthening governance in the EU’s eastern neighbourhood should remain a strategic priority. This includes investment in institutional coordination, support for legal and procedural alignment, and continued engagement through EU agencies and CSDP frameworks. By addressing root drivers rather than symptoms, the EU can improve its capacity to manage migration while contributing to stability and resilience beyond its borders.

References

Council of the European Union. The European Annual Asylum and Migration Report (2025), Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council, COM(2025) 795 final, Brussels, 11 November 2025

Council of the European Union. Implementation of Interoperability – State of Play, Council Note, 13061/25, JAI.1 LIMITE, Brussels, 3 October 2025

European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex). Annual Risk Analysis 2025/2026, Warsaw, Publications Office of the European Union, May 2025

European Commission and High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. The European Union’s Strategic Approach to the Black Sea Region, Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council, JOIN(2025) 135 final, Brussels, 28 May 2025

McAuliffe, M., Oucho, L.A. (eds.). World Migration Report 2024, Geneva, International Organization for Migration, 2024

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2024, Copenhagen, UNHCR Global Data Service, 2024.