This is a blog about current facts and data.

Saturday, 27 June 2026

Will the new EU migration rules work? | Inside Story


 

The European Union's new migration policy [music] comes into force. The sweeping pact aims to tighten border controls and change

asylum rules. But will it deter [music] people from seeking refuge in Europe?

And what role have the blocks politics played? This is [music] Inside Story.

[music]

Hello, welcome to the program. I'm Anna Burns Francis. It's called the European Union Pact on Migration and Asylum and

it took effect on Friday. The policy is the culmination of years of tough negotiations between member states on

how to handle incoming asylum seekers and other migrants. The pact is being described as the most significant

overhaul of Europe's migration rules to date, and it introduces stricter measures for people who want to enter the EU. Human rights groups and the left

say the reforms could undermine the rights of people seeking refuge. But the right says the new policy doesn't go far enough. In a moment, we'll discuss with

our guests the challenges Brussels is facing to implement this pact. But first, this report from Ferdier Car.

The European Union is implementing a sweeping overhaul of its migration rules.

The pact on migration and asylum aims to tighten controls at Europe's borders with quick mandatory screening for

migrants through an EUwide database, faster returns for people whose asylum claims are rejected, and a so-called

solidarity mechanism compelling member states to either relocate asylum seekers where most arrive, like Italy and Greece, or provide other aid.

Immigration has been an increasingly divisive issue across Europe in both the EU and non-member states.

Earlier this week, a knife attack in the northern Irish city of Belfast triggered violence with masked attackers targeting

homes they believed belonged to foreignb born residents.

And anti-immigrant sentiment has led to a surge in support for farright parties across the EU.

That largely began after 2015 when record numbers of asylum seekers began arriving in Europe. They were fleeing

war and instability in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. Scenes of families arriving on overcrowded boats

or drowning in the attempt to cross led to calls for them to be allowed safe passage. The same year, Germany allowed

more than 1 million asylum seekers to enter the country. Now, the far-right anti-immigration AFD party leads opinion

polls. [applause] Mainstream parties there and across Europe are increasingly appealing to anti-immigration sentiment.

In the last 13 months, EU colleagues have told me the German attitude was the problem, that they wanted to go much further to enforce stricter regulations

in Europe, that Germany was the break on that. Well, we're no longer slowing down the train. Now, we're in the driver's seat.

EU researchers also warned that misinformation online is fueling anti-migrant views. For European

leaders, the pact is more than an overhaul of asylumseeking procedures.

It's an attempt to convince increasingly skeptical voters that the block is responding to their concerns. But rights

groups say it may jeopardize the rights of those seeking protection. Frediaakar Alazer for Inside Story.

[music]

All right, let's bring in our guests for today. Marta Wheelinder is EU advocacy director at International Rescue Committee. She joins us from Brussels.

Natalie Tochi is a professor of practice at John Hopkins University, SIS Europe.

She's joining us from Rome. And Peter Clipper is editor-inchief at Brussels Report. Also joining us from Brussels. A welcome to each of you. Thank you.

Marta, can I start with you? Does Europe have an immigration problem?

Thank you very much for having me. Um, I think it's certainly safe to say that there was a need uh for an overhaul of

the previous system um in in how the EU and its member states approached

migration and asylum. Um I think of course there was a need to ensure that there wasn't a disproportionate

responsibility laid upon the countries of first entry such as Italy, Spain, Cyprus, Greece. Um there was also a

strong need to find solutions for the inadequate reception uh facilities and capacity and asylum processing systems.

Um and indeed a need for safe uh and legal pathways. Um so in that sense u indeed there were shortcomings and

issues in the in the EU's previous approach. Um and but I think what we're concerned about here is that the

pack that now uh com will start being implemented that it may not provide uh durable solutions to these

issues um in ways that also uphold fundamental rights and uh and international refugee law.

Yeah. Natalie, can I ask you? You are in Rome. So you are in Italy, one of the countries that is geographically the

front line as it stands for this issue, but the EU has dozens of state members.

Has this been a failing on behalf of other countries not to support those that are that first line for refugees

arriving on the shores of the of the European continent?

I mean if you look at the number of uh asylum seekers in general of uh also

migrants uh in Italy compared to other European countries particularly north European countries actually still today

there is a much higher number of uh both refugees and migrants in North European countries. So if you're simply

looking at this as a question of overall numbers then actually no. Now, of

course, there has been a moment, a turning point because, you know, once upon a time, if we go back to the 1990s

to the early 2000s, actually the direction that uh migrants and refugees

came into Europe was actually fairly um in a sense distributed, right? I mean, there were migrants particularly in the 1990s, refugees coming from the Balkans.

Then, of course, there was uh Afghanistan, the Middle East, Africa. So the geographical distribution was really rather varied particularly after the

Arab uprisings um and particularly given that the Arab uprisings essentially came just before the um or you know just

before the sovereign debt crisis in Europe which as we know hit particularly southern Europe. What you end up having in those years. So you know starting

2011, 12, 13, 14 is basically on the one hand this flux that is particularly

coming from subsaharan Africa through North Africa given that it is going through a moment of destabilization in

the context of the Arab uprisings which then of course arrives at the first port of arrival which are southern European

countries which in those years were undergoing an economic crisis. So that's the moment in which basically the mechanism right the let's call it the

the implicit social contract on migration in Europe breaks right and it's really been since then that

Europeans have been on the search for a new model now of course the problem and as indeed you know we were beginning to

discuss a moment ago the problem is that this all happens also at a time in which um there is this first wave of

growing nationalist populism in Europe and then of course the second wave which is what we're in now. And so, in a sense the um that you know there are pretty

good reasons why of course the underlying contract governing both asylum and migration in Europe need to be rethought but that rethinking is

happening in a fundamentally different political climate in Europe which ends up with the solutions which we're probably going to end up talking about in just one moment.

Yeah. Peter, can I bring you in here because Natalie's point is that this is a migration that has been happening for years and years and years and yet we are

in a moment of increased nationalism and more populism and politics. And so why now has this become the propelling

moment for a change in the way the union does handle migration?

Well, I think uh slowly we have seen uh voters um increasingly supporting uh

immigration critical political forces or rather forces that want an end to some of the chaos that we've seen uh last

year um still despite the progress still 200,000 people entered illegally into

the EU. So you know in a way this debate is not even about do we want more migrants or less or more asylum seekers

or less. It's about um making sure that the democratic policy choices on who is allowed to enter and who is not are respected.

M can I come to you because that there is that issue of being a migrant or being undocumented or being quote unquote illegal. How much crossover is

there really in terms of people who reach European shores or borders and claim that they need asylum? And how

much of it is a problem when people become undocumented or quote unquote overstay and become illegal?

Well, we know from working with communities and individuals across Europe and in fact across the entire arc of displacement uh that most people of course wish to go through legal routes.

uh they wish to enter the system and become regularized. Um and in fact of course uh under international law and

under refugee law uh each person uh has the right to have their case individually and adequately assessed

with the legal safeguards and with uh assistance to that. Um what we see much of the time is that people are

trapped in lengthy asylum procedures because our reception and asylum systems are underresourced and there's a lot of strain on countries of first entry. Uh

and it therefore happens that sometimes people move on through secondary movement and may get lost in the system.

So, it's of course essential now um that further resources are allocated to be able to process each and individual

claim for asylum adequately and see who has a solid claim for asylum who is um eligible for international protection.

Natalie, can I pick up on the point there about the allocation of resources here? Because when we look back over the years, I think 2015, it was called a

migrant crisis. And there was an argument at the time that the huge influx, the numbers as they were, I think political scientist Cass Mad said,

was it really a crisis? Because he argued that Europe had the financial resources to deal with this and yet it didn't is his argument. But also, may I suggest that it hasn't up until today?

Well, I mean, absolutely. In fact, um the migration crisis has never really been a crisis about migration. It's a

political crisis about migration. So, it is not really about the actual flows which even at their peak were frankly

speaking for you know one of the richest continents on earth um a you know Europe

of uh you know almost 500 uh million people of course that they can deal with an influx even when it reached a peak of

you know 3 million or something a year right so of course it's manageable I mean particularly honestly if you compare it to the influx of refugees

within African, you know, the African country within the Middle Eastern region. I mean, you know, just think about the percentage of refugee in a

country like Lebanon, right? So, it's actually even shocking to use the word crisis when referring to it in terms of

migration per se. Now, it has of course constituted a political crisis. It's been a crisis of solidarity within the

uh the union and it's been of course a major crisis of international solidarity uh visav indeed uh the refugees and uh the migrants themselves.

Right? So, it's a political crisis and that political crisis has been both fed by and has in turn been feeding

essentially the political crisis that is encapsulated by indeed what Kasmade works on which is the rise of nationalist populism in Europe.

Yeah. And so Peter, if it is a political crisis, is this pact really the right approach to tackle it?

Well, there's good side, there's bad sides. Um, honestly, I think to redistribute people within a

passport free zone, the Shenan zone, uh, and to present that as a solution for some of the, um, you know, the migration

pressures or the, um, the lack of quick procedures or safe uh, pathways is

just bizarre. And now we see countries like Poland basically refusing to uh, implement that. and Poland is led by pro

pro-EU governments by Mr. Tullk. Uh so um honestly I think um a lot more can be

expected from a different uh legal measure that is currently being negotiated the returns regulation which

will for the first time allow EU countries to negotiate uh return hubs uh

which means that uh people entering um illegally and then uh seeing their

asylum request denied and then uh refusing to go back to their country of origin uh risk being sent over there

which may have um quite an effect at least that's what we see uh in a way um what has worked uh in Australia the

Australian system is not perfect but if you compare the number of people dying at sea in Europe that was I think 30,000

people in the last decades compared to Australia clearly um it is a lot more humane uh to uh to do it in this way and

people are not being duped by uh human smugglers. Also um of course on top of

that you do need um legal pathways but those need to be restricted by uh you know the democratic choices of the um

European voters. Of course, the problem is though that is when populism and rhetoric comes into it, isn't it Marta? That the voice of

the people is not perhaps an accurate reflection of the situation or the issue or the means to solve it.

No, absolutely. And I think um the return regulation that the previous speaker just referred to um I think um

it's it cannot be seen as a humane uh solution. Uh we see it as a systematic dismantling if anything of protections

and a significant setback for for rights. Uh it will be one of the mo most punitive immigration instruments that we

have seen uh in recent EU history. It will um it will lead to significantly ramped up deportation powers for EU

member states. It's likely to lead to immigration raids uh not only in people's homes but potentially also

within NGO facilities like ours. Uh people will be uprooted from their communities where they may have lived now for several years in EU member

states. Families will be torn apart likely and people will be held in in prison-like conditions. the article 17

return hubs. I mean, these are bound to be legal black holes, offshore detention uh facilities. So, I think um it's

important not to um brush over this and refer to the return regulation as a as a

humane system um when it's certainly isn't. uh we need to bear in mind the human realities of these policies and

how they will affect um individuals and and communities who have come to Europe to seek protection.

16:5016 minutes, 50 secondsNatalie, can I bring you in here and perhaps you have some thoughts on this as well. They're called offshore return

hubs. By another name, I assume most people would consider them a detention center of sorts. Do you see it as

problematic that Europe is outsourcing this to a third party country if I'm trying to use the most neutral language?

Well, I mean, of course, it's absolutely problematic. Uh, if we want to see a silver lining in this uh in a weird way, it is that I don't think it

will actually be implemented. And I don't think it will be implemented because in order for it to be implemented, what you need to have is

those willing third countries. They may be terrible human rights violating countries, but they have to be terrible human rights violating countries that

are actually willing to do this for the EU. Now, there may be a very short list of awful countries that are willing to

do this, but it's an extremely short list because they need to get something in return, right? And you know, let's

just take the example of uh Italy, Albania, right? So, maybe you can have a country which is actually not awful. I mean, Albania, I mean, in the big scheme

of things, it's definitely not an awful country, but you know, it's Italy has been trying to do this, but Albania in a sense more the exception than the

norm because we know that Albania not only does it have, you know, um sort of long historical ties to Italy and it

therefore, in a sense wants to be nice to Italy, but above all, Albania wants to enter the European Union. So even if and

of course, as we know those uh extr territorial uh uh asylum processing uh centers in Albania are still not

functioning after basically four years of a farright government in Italy that promised that this would be its kind of

you know big thing and they're still not working because of all sorts of uh legal uh problems related to it. But even if

they were to work, as I said, it's connected to a particular demand that Albania has of entering the European Union. What Albania says is, you know,

if in two years time, we're actually within the European Union, of course, we're going to stop doing this, right?

So, and and as I said, Albania is just one of those few countries which is actually willing to do this. Frankly speaking, I can't think of any other

country that so far had has signalled a willingness to be part of this scheme.

Right? So the EU can have passed all the laws that it wants, all the packs that it w wants, doesn't necessarily mean quote, you know, sort of, you know, in

brackets thankfully that it will actually be implemented.

Peter, the other two speakers have raised some valid points and there has been criticism already uh that in countries the likes of Libya and Tunisia

which do see an influx of migrants waiting to make their journey, there are camps and there is recorded documented

cases of terrible assault and violence and all sorts of terrible crimes that occur. What responsibility does the

European Union have or should it have then if it insists on having these offshore detention centers or hubs as a

place to return to once people leave Europe?

Well, evidently uh such hubs should remain under uh EU jurisdiction. Uh all the human rights um standards should be

respected there. Uh if you look at Australia, they have not implemented it in a perfect way. Uh but they did manage

to stop the chaos. They did manage to avoid uh those mass drownings at sea that we've witnessed in Europe, the

chaos. Uh so I mean also the left leaning uh political forces in Australia have uh

been supporting this over I think almost two decades uh now. So what I think is that if you care about migration, if you

care about um asylum and um and if you care about avoiding

um that the public turns against all of this, then uh you should be even more keen to you know to stop the large scale

violation of uh migration policy of the democratic choices made by European governments on who is allowed to enter

and who's not allowed to enter. And I think at the moment um correct me if I'm wrong 80% or or twothirds of people that

are told they cannot remain in the EU they remain anyway. You know from a democratic point of view this I think is

a great u a great problem but also if you care about migration and public support for migration I think you should

be alarmed uh by that and it should be a priority to do something about it. It's an interesting point you raised there because you're you're tying one concept

to another, if I've interpreted that right, that if you care about it, you have to do it a certain way. But as we see consistently, there are lots of

different voices that have an opinion on this. Pope Leo has just been in Spain addressing a crowd that did include

migrants. He said, "It is not enough to manage arrivals, distribute statistics, reinforce borders, or lament deaths

after they have occurred. You, he said to the migrants, are not just numbers or files. You are people who have left behind families and homes. You have

dreams that no one has the right to despise.

Mart, I feel like you probably have quite a connection to this concept of what people go through when they make that decision to leave their home and

leave their country and to try and and go into the unknown. And and I just wonder if this is a moment where Europe

has misunderstood how to tackle the problem because of that overarching influence of if you

care about migration, you care about stopping something rather than finding a way to resolve [snorts] an unstoppable

problem. Their homeland is not somewhere they can stay.

Sure. Yeah. No, absolutely. And and first of all, there is no solid or consistent evidence that I'm aware of that suggests that harsher policies of

deterrence do create a significant deterrent effect as it were. And this is indeed because people many people are

fleeing who are fleeing conflict, persecution or entrenched poverty.

They don't make their migration decisions based on detailed knowledge of European migration policies. their primary concern is safety, survival and

the future of their families quite frankly and we really need to bear in mind also the the realities of the mig migration journeys that these

individuals take. Uh the IRC works with a lot of dis displaced people around the world and in Europe and we see that many

people seeking protection have risked their lives putting their lives indeed in the hands of smugglers, undertaking dangerous sea crossings, uh walking

through deserts and and and fearing extortion and so forth. So, someone who's willing to take those kinds of risks, um they're unlikely to be

deterred by the potential risk of being transferred to a so-called return hub.

And moreover, um I mean, the previous speaker also referred to these hubs operating under EU jurisdiction and

upholding human rights. It or fundamental rights. It's extremely difficult to see how that would happen.

Um it's not at all clear how these hubs will operate, how who will be accountable for the rights and well-being of the individuals inside of

them. Um and how European policy makers can in any way guarantee uh the safety.

But I'd like to also very briefly come back to again what the previous speaker alluded to that if one cares about people on the move, one would want to

implement for instance the return regulation. From our side, we see it differently. We do of course agree that orderly migration an orderly

migration system is needed of course but our concern is that the current approach focus primarily on detention and

externalization it is extremely expensive as we know we've seen the UK Rwanda deal and how much that cost before it failed. Okay.

Uh but also whilst this shows very limited evidence that it actually does create durable solutions. Yeah. There many other things that that states need to do instead.

Natalie, can I come to you for the last comment? We have about a minute left. If you can just give me a brief then I'm sure everyone wants to know will the pact work?

Um again you know will it work to actually govern migration uh into Europe? Frankly speaking, I have very

very low hopes. Will it work politically for European parties uh to the far right and the center right which have

basically been those supporting this pack to say that something is being done on migration, maybe it will work, right?

So, I think you know this entire conversation has really I think put the focus on this complete mismatch between

the actual practice of migration and governing migration and the political spin around it that particularly parties

to the nationalist far right have been mobilizing in Europe. All right, Natalie Tochi, a professor of practice at John's

26:0626 minutes, 6 secondsHopkins University, SIS Europe, joining us from Rome, Marta Wender, EU advocacy director, International Rescue Committee, joining us from Brussels. And

also from Brussels, Peter Clipper, editor-in chief at Brusselsreport.eu. Thank you all.

And thank you too for watching. You can see the program again anytime by visiting our website, aljazera.com.

And for further discussion, go to our Facebook page. That's facebook.com/ajj insidetory. You can also join the

conversation on x. Our handle is @ aj insidetory.

For now, that's it from me, Anna Burns, [music] Francis, and the team here. Al Jazer's coverage continues in just a moment. Stay tuned.

 

 

 

https://youtu.be/CZRzXqumD0A?si=AqkFouGVZpDBfNb4





No comments:

Post a Comment

Central Pastor, Neighbour And Police Chief Speak Day After Attack, Arrest Across Street From Church

  All down for you tonight at 10 looking forward to thank you. meantime, central pastor tony spell today defending his actions one day aft...