Let’s frame migrations correctly

Johan Leman, 17 December 2025

On the occasion of the International Migrants Day (18 December), I propose to frame the figures in a factual and objective way, before passing judgment and shaping policy. The only truly precise data available concern the distinction between Belgians and non-Belgians.

On 1 January 2025, the situation is as follows: in Belgium, 11,825,581 people live legally. Of these, 1,634,924 do not have Belgian nationality, i.e. 13.8%.
By Region, the figures are as follows:

Brussels-Capital Region: 1,255,795 inhabitants, of whom 467,200 are non-Belgians (37.2%).
Walloon Region: 3,706,990 inhabitants, of whom 407,500 are non-Belgians (11%).
Flemish Region: 6,864,766 inhabitants, of whom 755,100 are non-Belgians (11%).

These non-Belgians can be divided into four categories: expatriates, middle-class migrants, workers, and asylum seekers.
(A fifth category, not reflected in the statistics, concerns people residing illegally.)

For the Brussels-Capital Region, it is known that since 2000 two phenomena have been occurring:

From Southern Europe (Italy, Spain, Greece, Portugal), migrants mainly come from the middle classes — by which I mean people who have obtained a higher-education degree.
International institutions (which attract expatriates) currently create 48,000 direct jobs, 15% of which are held by Belgians, and in total — including indirect jobs — they generate 162,000 jobs. These jobs obviously do not go only to Brussels residents, but also to people living in the other two Regions.

What proportion do asylum seekers represent in all this? 13%.

Finally, a few reflections.
Is there, then, no migration crisis? Let us break this down.
Is there an expatriate crisis? Belgians are overrepresented in the employment created by the presence of the EU in Brussels.
Is there a refugee crisis? Most refugees from the Middle East are located in neighbouring countries (Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Iran and Pakistan). Only in the case of migrants from North Africa does the EU constitute the main pole of attraction, and within the EU primarily France and Italy.
What strikes me is that, here, public authorities are quite willing to factor in payback effects when it helps to balance their own budgets, but never speak of payback effects (such as consumption or employment) when discussing the costs of accommodating asylum seekers. Those who think that Belgium is well-known outside the EU borders by candidate-migrants are mistaken. These people are mostly familiar with the UK, Germany, France, and the Scandinavian countries. Belgium only becomes known once someone is already in Europe, and only then does our social security come into play. This will now change with the latest government measures.

Is there therefore no problem at all?
Yes, there is mainly a problem in the arrival neighbourhoods of low-skilled populations, particularly where children are unable to fulfil their parents’ dreams and instead stagnate or fall behind.
That is where investment must be made in an appropriate manner.

And what about those staying illegally? Since the late 1990s, multiple publications have assumed that worldwide, for every 100 legally residing migrants, there are 10 to 15 migrants residing illegally. But this has never been proven. These are purely estimates that authors and politicians repeat from one another. True? Not true? In some areas, undoubtedly it is true; in others, not at all. From my own research in the 1990s, I concluded that the transnational mobility of migrants staying illegally is greatly underestimated. So yes, in certain areas, quite a few people reside illegally. In others, not at all. And as for exactly who we are talking about… this varies considerably. Politically, the priority for deportation should focus on those involved in criminal activity.

Back