Poland’s border check: beginning of the end of Schengen?
When Poland started a border check with Germany and Lithuania this week, this was not the first time that a Schengen country took such a step. These measures are generally justified as necessary to curb irregular migration, combat human trafficking or address national security concerns. But for many analysts, this may be one of the clear signs yet that the borderless travel region of the European Union, which is seen as a symbol of integration and general identity, is under increasing stress.According to the Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusks, control is temporary and aims to prevent human trafficking and irregular migration. Nevertheless, this step comes a few weeks later when Germany investigated all its land boundaries as well as the Chancellor Frederick Merz under the new orthodox government. For many observers here in Brussels, tight-for-tat measures reflect a deep innings away from European solidarity and towards national selfishness.
What is Schengen?
Built in the 1990s, the Schengen region allows passport-free travel in 29 European countries, which covers most of the European Union and many non-members such as Norway and Switzerland. It ends the free movement of more than 450 million people and underlines Europe’s single market by terminating the internal border check for goods, services and labor. Equally for businesses, travelers and passengers, Schengen is one of the most practical achievements of the European Union.In an interview with DW, Associate Professor Birte Niennaber at the University of Luxembourg underlined that Europe is watching a slow erosion of border-free moment in Europe, a border at a time.
Domino effect is already running
David Columbi, a migration researcher at the Center for European Policy Studies (CEPS), located at Brussels, agreed that the Polish-German controversy recently fits into a broad European pattern.France has retained the border investigation since the 2015 terrorist attacks. Austria first presented control over its borders with Slovenia and Hungary in September 2015, at the height of the refugee crisis, and the migration pressure and internal security, renewed them every six months later.Slovenia introduced a check with Croatia in less than a year, when later, after joining the Schengen, cited migration and concerns on organized crime. And Germany, which had long opposed tightening its internal borders, began to expand the final autumn, the European Commission has not yet formally challenged. Under the European Union law, such checks are allowed only under extraordinary conditions and must be temporary.“These limits control are purely political symbolism, without the real impact of curbing the migration,” Professor Niyaneber says. She emphasizes that with the rise of far-flung forces in Europe, the populist narratives are getting grounds in all parties. Centrist leaders face pressure to show “cruelty” on migration, and boundary control is a visible remedy popular with the public.
Boundary symbolism on substance
But how effective are they really? Official data suspected the relevance of the boundary check within the Schengen area. The German police say that in the first month of the increased border operations in this spring, only 160 asylum seekers were removed. Polish media reports that Germany returned to about 1,000 migrants in Poland between May and mid -June, a figure not quite different from previous years.Migration expert Niyaneber said, “Smugglers or those who try to enter irregularly know how to avoid official posts.” “Controls do not stop them. They only create confusion of control.”Researcher Columbi agreed that such policies are more about optics than results. He underlined that the European Union members states have so far failed to prove the need for control, for example, to curb the migration, or to prevent terrorist attacks.
Economic cost
Meanwhile, in areas such as the border community, especially in areas such as Luxembourg, Austria and Poland, are already feeling negative effects: wait for a long time, disrupt supply chains, and growing economic stress on local businesses across the border. A detailed European Parliament study estimated that restoring the internal border investigation causes sufficient time losses: 10-20 minutes for cars and 30–60 minutes for heavy vehicles, and spends around € 320 million to the transport sector-and this is only accounting for delays, not the comprehensive economic decline.Hence the economic cost is not trivial. Schengen affects the free movement of goods, services, capital and people: four columns of the European Union’s single market. Prices may increase, the supply chain may slow down, and lose border jobs and businesses.A Bulgarian Logistics Association recently estimated that the range of sector € 300 million ($ 352 million) is spent annually before the limit is delayed. Since Romania and Bulgaria joined the Schengen this year, traffic across the border has increased significantly and has become more efficient. In the first three months of 2025 alone, there was a 25 percent increase in traffic between the two countries, with more than 160,000 vehicles crossing the same period compared to 128,000, which a year ago in the same period, according to the Romania’s Road Administration Agency.The average waiting time at the crossing has exceeded 10 hours, which is less than two. For regional halliers and border cities that rely on smooth trade flow, it means rapid delivery and a revived economic approach. The return of hard borders, experts warning, can undo that progress, not only kills supply chains, but also a livelihood of thousands that depend on seamless daily crossings.
Schengen legal limits – quietly bypass?
The European Union law allows internal border check in exceptional cases: they should be limited to six months with clearly appropriate renewal. Nevertheless, many member states have just continued to increase them. France’s control has been almost continuously for almost a decade. Austria, Denmark, Sweden and now Germany have also worked under long -term exceptions.“We can see that these border checks are becoming permanent in some member states. It was never an intention of Schengen Agreement,” says the researcher Columbi.He explains that the European Commission has faced criticism to not implement the limit more strongly, through the processes of violation. It can risk opening of floods for others, creating a domino effect.
Modifying Schengen – or leave it?
The European Union and its leaders are aware of the risks. If the internal border check becomes permanent, the Schengen system may be completely exposed.This will not only disrupt the free movement of the European Union’s single market, goods, services and capital, the free movement of major pillars, but also the legal integrity of the European Union, the increase in costs for businesses, slow supply chains, potentially destroy the trust of citizens in the European project.The Commission is now working to update the Schengen Borders Code and launch two digital border management tools: Entry/Exit System (ESS) and ETIA, a visa-wiver screening platform. Both are designed to enter the zone and reduce the alleged requirement of internal investigations for citizens of the non-European Union.The Commission says that these reforms represent the development of Shingen, not by its breakdown. But Columbi argues that if Schengen is to survive, it will require more than a legal tweex or digital tool.Rather, they say, “We need political courage, reconstruction of mutual trust between member states and enforce by the European Commission.” Above all, the subject of migration should be de-politic, allowing public debate to remove boundary control with ineffective measures.Both experts suspect that this will happen anytime soon. In many countries, the pressure to rebuild national sovereignty with far-flung parties, with far-fetched parties, is only increasing, Niennaber explains. She warns that if governments continue to use internal border controls as political equipment, the Schengen area may soon fall into pieces, rather than the final resort security equipment.
What is at stake
Whether Schengen should be separated, economic damage can be severe. B Border Parils will face long -term traffic, while small businesses in border areas may lose important customers. For everyday citizens, it can mean long queues on boundaries, high prices in stores, and services on borders and access to job markets.Columbi says, but symbolic loss can just deepen, “Schengen is one of the most visible signs of a common European identity and a flag-jahaz achievement.” Whether Schengen should fall, this is the most solid way to experience the European Union as an international project for citizens will also fall.To prevent this, both experts argue that the European Union and its member states must recommend the main idea behind the Schengen: that Europeans must be able to move freely without fear, delay or political posture in their common continent.
