Italy vs Greece comparison
To contextualize the Greek case, I compare Greece with Italy—another EU external border country where migrants also arrive. As shown in the diagrams, between 2016 and 2021 both countries registered similar numbers of arrivals, with Italy recording slightly higher figures. Despite this, and largely due to the exceptional arrivals of 2015, Greece received around 3.5 times more EU funding than Italy. It is nevertheless important to note that by March 2016, when the Emergency Support Instrument was established, only about 60,000 refugees from the 2015 arrivals remained stranded in Greece, while the route would be effectively closed following the EU–Turkey Statement.
Greece received approximately €3.5 billion in funding, compared to about €1 billion allocated to Italy. Both countries received similar amounts—around €450 million each—from the Internal Security Fund. However, Greece received almost four times more funding than Italy from the AMIF, in addition to approximately €670 million from the Emergency Support Instrument.
It is revealing to examine how AMIF and ESI funding was distributed between state and non-state actors in the two countries. In Italy, nearly all AMIF and ESI funding (approximately 99.7%) was channelled to state actors, with only 0.3% allocated to UN agencies. In contrast, in Greece around 60.5% of funding went to international NGOs, while only 39.5% was directed to state actors. This stark divergence points to a systematic downgrading of the Greek state by European institutions after the financial crisis, when national authorities were treated as less capable or trustworthy in managing reception and asylum, and non-state actors were instead prioritised as the primary implementers of EU policy.