Current Developments in Schengen: A Proof of its Crisis or Flexibility?

Since 2016, the question of whether the Schengen agreement is reaching the end of its lifespan has been broadly discussed. However, more than one year later, Schengen is still alive. Drawing on Koselleck, this paper examines whether a state of crisis can be identified within Schengen which is, despite its importance, somehow in the shadow of the refugee policies. As the concept of crisis is quite vague, the discourse historical approach is used to research how the crisis in Schengen is socially constructed through the discourse of EU institutions. The analysis indicates that whereas reintroductions of internal controls are perceived as non-problematic, external borders must be controlled more thoroughly; otherwise, Schengen will collapse. However, the Schengen acquis is considered efficient and if observed properly, no reform is needed. In compliance with that, all measures adopted since 2016 have supported (and not reshaped) the current Schengen legislation (e.g. the European Coast and Border Guard enhancing external controls). By contrast, proposals to change the course of Schengen have failed (Mini-Schengen). The claim that Schengen can be saved by respecting the existing rules shows how strikingly Schengen cooperation differs from the EU asylum policies where the focus is on substantial legislative reform. Hence, the crisis within Schengen refers more to poor implementation of external controls than to inadequate legislation. It will be interesting to see how Schengen evolves once the two years of possible internal reintroductions expire and how fences within Schengen are dealt with. So far, it seems resilient enough to survive.