On Tuesday, EU home affairs ministers convened in Copenhagen, expressing broad support for two controversial proposals by the European Commission aimed at addressing irregular migration into the bloc. These proposals, which the Commission describes as “innovative solutions,” focus on outsourcing asylum seekers and migrants with rejected claims to third countries. Danish Minister for Immigration and Integration, Kaare Dybvad Bek, emphasized the need for new agreements with countries outside the EU, reflecting a shift in attitudes among various member states regarding migration policies.
The essence of these proposals includes redefining the EU’s concept of “safe third countries.” This redefinition would allow member states to reject asylum applications without evaluating them and to transfer applicants to countries with which they have no prior connection. A “safe third country” is defined as a non-EU nation that adheres to international standards in treating asylum seekers, which includes protections against persecution and serious harm. However, the proposed changes eliminate the necessary link between the asylum seeker and the third country, potentially leading to partnerships with nations akin to the UK’s Rwanda deportation program, which faced legal challenges. The Danish Minister noted a noticeable shift among member states toward accepting these ideas, driven by a mix of changing opinions and new governmental leadership.
While there appears to be a consensus among many countries regarding these proposals, future opposition is anticipated from the European Parliament, particularly from groups such as the Socialists and Democrats, Greens/EFA, and The Left, which typically oppose stricter migration rules. This resistance underscores the tension between more conservative national policies and the more progressive stances historically taken by certain EU parliamentary factions on issues of migration.
Another significant proposal discussed at the meeting revolves around the concept of “return hubs.” This initiative, part of the broader return regulation, would allow member states to transfer rejected asylum seekers to facilities outside the EU while processing their paperwork for return to their home countries. Unlike an EU-wide program for establishing these deportation centers, the proposal provides a legal framework for individual countries to negotiate arrangements with willing host nations, potentially incentivized financially. The Italian government’s conversion of centers in Albania into return hubs serves as an illustrative example, with calls for similar initiatives across member states.
Indeed, migration stands as a priority for Denmark, and the nation aims to advance the Commission’s proposals, particularly regarding the return regulation. Minister Dybvad Bek expressed hope for a general agreement on return policies during Denmark’s presidency of the Council of the EU. This ambition aligns closely with the Commission’s broader agenda, with Internal Affairs and Migration Commissioner Magnus Brunner endorsing Denmark’s approach during the upcoming presidency period.
There has been a surge of cooperation among several EU countries, including Austria, Germany, France, the Czech Republic, and Poland, which recently united under a common declaration aimed at enhancing migrant return efforts, fortifying external borders, and fostering partnerships with non-EU nations. This unified stance reflects a shared commitment to managing migration more effectively, demonstrating how external pressures and internal dynamics within the EU landscape are shaping contemporary approaches to migration governance.
