The reckless, arrogant and narcissistic decision by Angela Merkel, Germany’s second-worst chancellor, to throw open her country’s doors in 2015 was one of the series of acts that led The Economist to describe her that year as “the indispensable European.”  Thanks to the freedom of movement within the EU that is one of the bloc’s most important principles (and which was reinforced by the removal of inter-EU border controls by countries that had signed up to the Schengen Agreement), Merkel’s unilateral decision ensured that many other EU countries, perhaps most notably Sweden, would see an influx too.

The political consequences were quick to make themselves felt, and they raised an awkward question. If Merkel was an “indispensable” European, what would a dispensable one look like? To start with, while Brits voted for Brexit for a wide range of reasons, it’s almost certain that alarm over what was going on in Germany helped tip the electorate over into opting, by a relatively narrow margin, for Brexit. The “indispensable” European had helped demonstrate to those voters that the EU must be dispensed with. As a result, the EU lost one of its largest member-states.

And, yes, it is ironic that, because of the disastrous handling of British immigration policy (above all, to heap irony on the irony, by the wretched Boris Johnson, one of those most responsible for the referendum’s result) the consequences of Brexit has been to worsen the U.K.’s immigration mess. But that’s a story for another day.

So, back to Merkel, because her contribution to the unraveling of the European “project” did not stop with her role in making Brexit possible.

Lisa Haseldine, writing in The Spectator:

 A decade later, that gleaming foundational principle of the EU – the freedom to move between member states uninhibited – has been put on hold, perhaps indefinitely. Nine EU countries – Poland, Slovenia, Italy, Austria, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, France, Germany – have temporary border controls in operation.

Since 2015, more than 7.5 million asylum claims have been made across the EU. The Willkommenskultur (‘welcome culture’) championed by Merkel is nothing more than a sour memory for many of Europe’s governing parties. EU members from Poland to Spain are buckling under the political and social strain of illegal migration (euphemistically referred to as ‘irregular migration’). Populist and nationalist parties are on the rise, and many of today’s politicians would dispute that the EU should grant inalienable rights to whoever crosses its borders…

In theory, most of the temporary border controls currently in force are due to expire in the coming months, but it would be political suicide to lift them. Sacrificing free movement under Schengen is a quick win for EU members unwilling or unable to do more to alleviate the concerns of their populations.

And, it is worth adding, there is something else. While the E.U. was never a bastion of free speech, it at least liked to pretend that freedom of expression was a “European Value.” However, panicked by the rising popular discontent brought about by the Merkel surge and what followed, the EU, and, for that matter, the U.K. too, have given up on that pretense, and over the last ten years have been engaged in narrowing the limits of “acceptable” free speech, particularly, but, not only, online.

Meanwhile, via The Daily Telegraph:

New government statistics also revealed that Berlin was struggling to achieve its goal of persuading Syrian refugees to return home in the wake of the collapse of the Assad regime.

The German interior ministry has disclosed that only around 1,300 of Germany’s one million Syrian refugees have gone back to the Middle Eastern state, despite the government offering them cash incentives to do so.

What a surprise.