INTERVIEW: Return hubs are ‘not easy to do', says former Commissioner Schinas
The adoption of the controversial pact in 2024 marked a major overhaul of the European Union's migration and asylum system. The new rules are set to come into force in summer 2026 and the implementation phase is in full swing, amid calls for an even more rigorous stance on migration.
But, rolling out the 10 legislative files making up the pact might not be straightforward. Member states had to submit national implementation plans by December 2024, but some are dragging their feet.
Hungary, for example, has yet to submit its plan. 'The Pact means the end of Hungary,' Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said on Monday. Poland, too, remains fiercely opposed.
What follows is an edited transcript.
Euractiv: Looking at the bigger picture, how do you view the apparent shift in EU migration policy, with more and more member states pushing for a tougher migration policy?
Schinas: The way that migration policy evolves at national and European level is not the result of an experiment that is taking place in a laboratory. Policy follows what the people and the voters want.
People across Europe – and I would say across political families – want more order on migration and on migration management. They want procedures, controls, border management. They want solidarity [between EU countries], and they want returns.
Many are highlighting a newfound sense of unity on migration. That is quite striking, considering that just a few years ago, putting migration on the EUCO agenda would have triggered major divisions.
I fully agree with you that we have now a new... how should I call this? In French, we would call it a 'prise de conscience' [awakening] around migration.
I'm very happy to see that this is not only happening, but it's intensifying, and permeates policy beyond migration. It goes into foreign policy, development policy, the way we spend our money in third countries... and all of this is good.
Do you think the concept of return hubs would have been possible just five years ago?
I understand that there is a political market that wants to explore these return hubs and extraterritorial solutions. I do not oppose it in principle, but I don't think that it's something that's easy to do.
From a legal standpoint?
From all points of view, judging from what I saw and what I tried to do over the last five years. My advice would be: It would be okay to explore, but it would be a mistake to chase an objective not doable in the short term, or raise expectations.
I'm not sure that this is the way to proceed. I belong to a school of thought that policy should be based on what is feasible.
You coordinated the Commission's work on the new pact from 2019 to 2024. How do you assess progress so far, considering that several member states still haven't submitted their national strategies?
I think that you cannot answer this without looking at how European migration policy was in the past [before 2019]. The short answer is: there wasn't any.
We had repeated attempts and efforts that have all failed. The only thing that we had was this obligatory relocation scheme, taking people from Italy and Greece following the collapse of Syria [in 2015, Europe experienced a significant migration crisis, largely driven by a surge in refugees fleeing conflict and instability in Syria and other countries].
I'm very proud that, at the end of my mandate, we managed to have the first ever regulatory framework for migration and asylum.
I have no doubt that everything that is happening – now or next year when the pact come into force – will be a huge improvement compared to the situation back in December 2019.
Still, Poland and Hungary are staunchly against the new pact. If they don't implement it, do they risk jeopardising the whole approach?
There have been some objections, but I think it's fair to say that these objections did not materialise – unlike in 2015 – into a block on the pact.
Each member state's position is legitimate. However, I would say that these have been stances of member states [Hungary, Poland] wanting to make a point on where they stand on migration – rather than blocking Europe from having a comprehensive migration policy.
It is very telling that we may have lost Warsaw and Budapest, but we have won Giorgia Meloni's Rome. I am optimistic that this will not hinder or prevent the pact's implementation.
Do you see potential for the consensus to crumble once hard numbers – such as for the Solidarity Pool in October – are on the table?
I do not agree. We have put so much time, effort, and resources into this European regulatory approach. It would be suicidal for Europe to arrive at the point that we are now and then begin undoing it.
I fail to see who will be well served by doing this. The only people that would be happy if we fail to live up to our regulatory commitments would be those who want to destroy Europe – the Le Pen's and the Mélenchon's of this world... the Podemos and the Vox.
The ones who have been consistently attacking the pact and calling for its demolition are the extremes – both on the right and the left.
I want to be clear that I don't put Warsaw and Budapest in this spot; it's another league. With their stances, they want to remind us, how they view migration policy. But I say again that I don't expect them to block Europe from having and implementing a common regulatory policy on migration.
EU leaders to debate 'accelerated implementation' of migration law reforms
A German proposal for Council conclusions seen by Euractiv calls for implementing the rules earlier than planned, but member states are divided.
(vib, aw)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euractiv
9 hours ago
- Euractiv
Dutch deliver first Patriot missiles to Ukraine under new Trump-NATO plan
The Netherlands will deliver the first package of US-made weapons, including Patriot missiles, to Ukraine under a new deal in which European allies cover the cost, Dutch Defence Minister Ruben Brekelmans announced Monday. 'The Netherlands will deliver a €500 million package of US weapon systems (incl. Patriot parts and missiles),' Brekelmans wrote on social media, adding that it will be the 'first NATO ally' to do so. Under an agreement reached last month, several European countries committed to sending US-made weapons from their existing stockpiles to Ukraine and pledged to replenish them with the same systems. To enable rapid delivery, the US has promised a rapid backfill, though implementation may prove complex The packages include highly sophisticated air-defence Patriot systems, which cost around €1 billion per battery and €4 million per missile. 'Great to see the Netherlands taking the lead and funding the first package of US military equipment for Ukraine under NATO's Prioritised Ukraine Requirements List (PURL) initiative,' NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte wrote on X following the announcement. Germany is also expected to deliver Patriot launchers in the coming days. Each package under the PURL initiative is estimated to be worth around €500 million and contains "equipment and munitions identified by Ukraine as operational priorities,' according to the Western alliance. Rutte, who also contacted all 32 NATO members urging them to contribute to the initiative, said he expects 'further significant announcements from other Allies soon.' Countries that expressed interest in early July include Germany, Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Canada, Rutte said at the time. (de)
Euractiv
10 hours ago
- Euractiv
NATO steps up presence near Russia's Arctic coast
Four NATO members have conducted naval exercises in the Arctic waters as part of a broader deployment to patrol the High North, the alliance's maritime command announced on social media on Monday. Ships from the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, and Germany took part in manoeuvres off Norway's northern coast and the High North, aimed at 'flexing the Alliance's ability to work together,' according to NATO's Allied Maritime Command (MARCOM). The drills form part of a broader deployment announced last week amid mounting tensions between NATO and Russia. The operation also aims to secure sea lanes and monitor undersea activity in the Arctic region, a strategically important area home to critical infrastructure, including undersea cables connecting mainland Europe to Norway's Svalbard archipelago. While NATO maintains a regular eye on northern European waters, it periodically intensifies surveillance and training in the region. The aim is 'to increase the Alliance's understanding the maritime environment, enhance information sharing, and rehearse navigational manoeuvres,' Commander Arlo Abrahamson, spokesperson for NATO's Allied Maritime Command, told Euractiv. The deployment came just before US President Donald Trump ordered the deployment of two nuclear submarines last week, which has been described as an extraordinary escalation in relations with Russia. It remains unclear whether the submarines are nuclear-powered or nuclear-armed, or where they have been sent. Earlier this year, several members of the Western military alliance conducted an operation involving drones in the Baltic Sea, as incidents targeting submarine cables in the region had begun to increase. (de)
Euractiv
10 hours ago
- Euractiv
Ukraine's chicken giant buys big Spanish poultry and pork producer
Major Ukrainian poultry firm MHP said on Monday that it had sealed a deal to acquire a 92% stake in Uvesa, one of Spain's leading poultry and pork producers, consolidating control of Europe's chicken market. The deal expands the presence of Kyiv-based MHP inside the EU, a company that already controls most of the war torn country's poultry production and has significantly increased exports to the bloc since the Russian invasion. The buyout gives MHP control over Uvesa's core operations, the company said on Monday, with Uvesa president Antonio Sánchez hailing the acquisition as a way to ensure "total food security.' MHP, which ranks among Ukraine's biggest employers, is also Europe's leading poultry producer but its growing European footprint hasn't come without controversy. The company has received multi-million EU loans – meant to support Ukraine's farming sector – despite criticism over lax oversight on environmental and animal welfare standards, according to an investigation by Follow the Money. In June, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development handed MHP an additional €40 million to boost energy security, ramp up production, and diversify operations to buffer the impact of Russia's war. In 2024, wartime trade liberalisation with Ukraine was slammed by French President Emmanuel Macron, who, amid farmer protests in France, said that allowing unlimited chicken imports mostly benefit MHP's founder and CEO, Yuriy Kosyuk. 'Who's benefiting, three-quarters of the time? One group, owned by a billionaire,' Macron said. 'Frankly, we don't want to make this gentleman even richer (...) it doesn't actually help Ukraine.' Quotas and contradictions European producer groups say the rapid expansion of Ukrainian poultry firms like MHP signals 'substantial financial capacity.' 'In that context, the continued calls for exceptional trade preferences and financial support from international donors can appear contradictory,' Birthe Steenberg, secretary general of EU poultry lobby AVEC, told Euractiv. A new EU-Ukraine trade agreement will raise the poultry export quota from 90,000 to 120,000 tonnes per year – short of full wartime liberalisation. It also includes a safeguard clause to suspend imports if they negatively impact the EU market – on economic or societal grounds – a provision viewed as controversial by Ukrainian producers. Farmer protests could justify import bans under new EU-Ukraine deal In practice, farmer protests could be cited as a 'societal difficulty' to trigger safeguard measures. Still, AVEC welcomed that MHP will be subject to full EU rules in Spain, including on animal welfare, environmental protection, labour standards, and food safety. 'We fully support this alignment and consider it a step toward a more balanced and fair integration of Ukraine's poultry sector into the European market framework,' Steenberg added. (jp)
