Debating responsibility‐sharing: An analysis of the European Parliament's debates on the Common European Asylum System

Abstract The Common European Asylum System (CEAS) has failed to ensure effective protection in times of high numbers of asylum seekers. CEAS reforms have not successfully introduced responsibility‐sharing mechanisms that can balance the effects of the Dublin Regulation's allocation rules. This paper analyzed the absence of substantial CEAS reforms by examining the discursive strategies used by Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) in asylum reform debates during the European Parliament's (EP) seventh legislative term (2009–2014). The mixed‐methods analysis revealed that: (a) MEPs across the political spectrum argued in favor of responsibility‐sharing, (b) MEPs from south‐eastern border European Union Member States were prone to use solidarity discursive strategies to speak in favor of responsibility‐sharing, (c) and that MEPs aligned their discursive strategies to the actual responsibility‐sharing mechanisms under discussion. These findings point to substantive and problem‐oriented debates in the EP. Yet, these debates did not translate into essential CEAS reforms.