EU countries increasingly keen on sending migrants outside bloc for processing
UK
pledged to send
migrants
to
Rwanda
three years ago, the
EU
said the measure was inhumane and broke international law.
But with rising xenophobic sentiment and more right-wing governments coming to power on the continent, the bloc is warming to such 'innovative solutions' to curb
immigration
.
'I think there is a broad support,' said Danish migration minister Kaare Dybvad, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency. Sending asylum seekers outside the bloc 'has so much traction now', he told the Financial Times.
Denmark
,
Italy
and
Germany
have been among those advocating for centres to be set up in non-EU countries to house people awaiting an asylum decision or repatriation.
READ MORE
Dybvad, a Social Democrat who led Denmark's own failed Rwanda plan, recalled the backlash triggered by this idea. The Danish government shelved the scheme amid a domestic political uproar in January 2023, and the UK's supreme court struck down the British plan later that year.
Danish minister of immigration and integration Kaare Dybvad (right) in conversation with Austrian interior minister Gerhard Karner. Photograph: Olivier Hoslet
By contrast, Dybvad said, 'now when I meet with colleagues from big member states like Germany, France, Poland, Italy' there was 'very strong support for moving forward'.
German interior minister Alexander Dobrindt, a Bavarian conservative, last month said that 'models involving third countries have majority support. A vast majority of member states have made it clear that this is a path the EU must take.'
The shift has been particularly stark in Germany, which 10 years ago opened up to refugees from Syria and other conflict zones, with then-chancellor
Angela Merkel
reassuring citizens that 'we can handle it' ('Wir schaffen das
'
).
But anti-migrant sentiment stoked by the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) and several deadly attacks by migrants have led Berlin to adopt increasingly harsher measures.
Other countries previously supportive of migrants, such as Luxembourg, have also changed tack as right-wing governments took over.
The EU's stunning shift on the 'externalisation' of migration comes amid a surge in public support for the far right, which has made immigration its cri du coeur.
[
Deportation flights signal Germany's pivot to hardline stance on migration
Opens in new window
]
But moves to outsource asylum have suffered legal setbacks, with human rights advocates warning that they could undermine the very foundation the EU was set up on.
'There's a broader trend in migration and asylum policymaking in the EU to make human rights secondary to political interests,' said Olivia Sundberg Diez, migration advocate at Amnesty International.
Demonstrators near the gates of 10 Downing Street in London in May 2024. Photograph: Benjamin Cremel/AFP via Getty Images
Britain's scheme – under which the UK would have sent asylum seekers to Rwanda for their claims to be processed there – was struck down by the UK supreme court amid concerns the people sent there could face harm. Then-prime minister
Rishi Sunak
tried to salvage the scheme by designating the country as 'safe', but the current government abandoned the plan.
A similar argument used by Italy – to designate certain countries as 'safe' for return – was challenged by the EU top court last week. Prime minister
Giorgia Meloni
reacted with fury, accusing the European Court of Justice of over-reach.
Andreina de Leo, a migration researcher at Maastricht University, said the ruling was 'not surprising' as it backed up Italian courts. But for Meloni and her right-wing government, she said, 'this plan has acquired such a symbolic meaning' that the premier had to lash out.
Meloni last year struck a deal with Albania to set up closed centres where migrants would be transferred while their Italian asylum applications were being processed – and most likely rejected.
After Italian courts challenged the scheme, Rome repurposed the facilities to house migrants awaiting deportation. A few dozen people have since been taken there, though most had to be taken back to Italy again before being repatriated, adding to the costs.
'To be honest, this concept doesn't work very well,' said Maciej Duszczyk, Poland's under-secretary of state for migration.
Civil rights activists protest after migrants intercepted in Italian waters arrive at Shengjin port in Albania in 2024. Photograph: Adnan Beci/AFP via Getty Images
Still, the European Commission has backed the idea of sending people awaiting deportation to 'return hubs' outside the EU – such as the repurposed Albanian centres.
Brussels also drafted legislation that could make Italy's original plan a reality, by proposing an EU list of 'safe' countries, and allowing member states to send asylum seekers there even if they don't have a link to those places.
'The Italian model will be possible again,' said one EU official, who added that governments would 'make the necessary adjustments' for asylum processing to work outside the bloc.
Germany is in talks with Rwanda to replicate the UK scheme, according to two people familiar with the discussions, though it is unclear how advanced the negotiations are given previous legal objections.
Rwanda also said this week it had agreed to take 250 migrants deported from the US, according to the government in Kigali.
The Netherlands, meanwhile, has been in talks with Uganda – a country that sentences LGBT+ people to death – about setting up a 'transit hub', according to the Dutch ministry of asylum and migration.
Denmark's Dybvad said centres would be ideally set up in 'countries in north Africa' or other 'stable countries, with stable governments'.
The EU already has arrangements to curb migration and is providing funding to countries including Tunisia and Libya, where the authorities have repeatedly been accused of violating human rights.
'You facilitate human rights abuses, not just for migrants but also for citizens [of these countries],' said Tineke Strik, a Green member of the European Parliament, in reference to the Tunisian government's crackdown on NGOs and dissidents.
While fewer migrants left the Tunisian shores in the first six months of this year compared with the same period last year, more have embarked on the perilous journey from Libya, according to the EU's migration agency Frontex.
Human rights activists say this points to the limitations of Europe's efforts to curb immigration by paying off authoritarian governments.
'These are unworkable and inhumane proposals that are extremely costly both on a human level, but also for the management of migration,' said Amnesty's Sundberg Diez.
'Governments are ignoring those costs to make grand political statements on promises that they may be unable to deliver on.
'
– Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2025
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RTÉ News
11 hours ago
- RTÉ News
Tariffs: Some clarity, but still a lot of uncertainty
After months of negotiations, on again-off again tariffs, delayed implementation dates and threatened higher levies, Donald Trump's 15% tariff on most imports from the EU to the US took effect at midnight on Thursday. It means many Irish products being exported to the US now face a tariff of 15% with, so far, very few exemptions. US President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced two weeks ago that the US and EU have agreed on a major tariff and trade deal. They announced the 15% rate, but the finer details have yet to be published as trade talks are ongoing, and the EU suspended retaliatory measures. Businesses are now waiting on this joint declaration, a final written trade agreement between the European Union and the United States to be published. Since April a baseline tariff of 10% had been in effect, this has now risen to 15%, better than a threatened 30%, although its still not good for businesses. Exporters and manufacturers in some sectors are still waiting on whether this rate will stick, or if it could change and when. What do we have clarity on? The EU's trade and tariff deal with the US has stabilised on a single 15% tariff rate for most EU exports. This rate applies across most sectors, including cars, semiconductors and pharmaceuticals. According to European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen, this 15% is a "clear ceiling" with "no stacking" and is "all-inclusive". "It gives much-needed clarity for our citizens and businesses. This is absolutely crucial," she said. There are certain exemptions to the 15% baseline, where zero-for-zero tariffs on several strategic products have been agreed. This includes all aircraft and component parts, certain chemicals, certain generics, semiconductor equipment, certain agricultural products, natural resources and critical raw materials. Where is there uncertainty? The EU is hoping that now that a framework is in place, there will be space to exempt more areas from tariffs in the future, but it's unclear when that might be. Some key elements, of the deal, particularly of interest to Irish exporters, still have to be negotiated. This includes what it will mean for the EU's dairy and spirits sector. On sectoral carve-outs, Tánaiste Simon Harris said the Government "very much wants to see zero-for-zero when it comes to the spirits industry." Approximately 95% of whiskey produced here goes abroad, with the vast majority going to the US. Irish whiskey, Irish cream and Irish drinks are protected under a geographical indication which means they must be made on the island of Ireland, production can't move to avoid a tariff, according to the Irish Whiskey Association Director Eoin Ó Catháin. "Until we see the exact wording of this joint declaration, which is to come from the EU and the US and until we understand exactly what exemptions are included as part of that agreement, we won't know for certain where spirits drinks or the indeed the Irish drinks industry as a whole will fall as part of this agreement," said Mr Ó Catháin. "As long as there's uncertainty, that does cause a lot of difficulties for exporters and for businesses who are hoping to grow." Last year Ireland exported almost €2 billion worth of agri-food produce to the US. So aside from spirits, Dairy and Agri food producers are still waiting for clarity on the potential for 'zero-for-zero' tariffs for certain agricultural products. While the Dairy Industry is highlighting broader implications for a tariff border on the island of Ireland. (see below) Pharmaceuticals which had previously been exempt from the 10% baseline tariff are now subject to the 15% rate. On Tuesday, just nine days after he personally agreed to a 15% EU-US tariffs deal, President Trump said in relation to the pharmaceutical sector this figure relates to "one year, one and a half years maximum". The US President also said "it's (the pharmaceutical tariff) going to go to 150%, and then it's going to go to 250% because we want pharmaceuticals made in our country," before specifically referencing pharmaceutical firms based in China and Ireland. This threat is coupled with uncertainty regarding the outcome of the US Department of Commerce's investigation under s232 of the Trade Expansion Act which is evaluating imports of pharmaceutical products. The EU said the 15% ceiling is clear and "all-inclusive", but there is still a question over the stability of that rate for pharmaceuticals. President Trump also announced a 100% levy on imported chips this week but said it will not apply to companies that are manufacturing in the US or have committed to do so. This means Apple and its 6,000 Irish employees would not be affected, after the tech giant committed to investing an additional $100 billion in its home market in the US. This announcement at the Oval Office was not a formal tariff announcement meaning it's unclear if Ireland and other Irish chip exporters will be impacted. What about tariffs across the island of Ireland? Two weeks since the deal was announced, this remains another area of uncertainty for businesses. Some sectors are calling for clarity on whether exports to the US from Northern Ireland (NI) will be treated differently to exports from the Republic of Ireland (ROI). The tariff for goods from the ROI is 15%, but the UK US trade deal agreed a 10% baseline tariff which applies to NI. Dairy Industry Ireland pointed out that the dairy industry operates on an all-island basis, with integrated supply chains and cross border trade in raw milk, ingredients, and finished products. It said any divergence in these tariffs could create huge issues and added cost for processors and farmers. The UK-US trade deal also contains a commitment to negotiate significantly preferential treatment for UK pharmaceutical products, contingent on the outcome of the s232 investigation, without clarity on a similar commitment for the EU. The difference in rates across the island could create a complicated situation and pose challenges for the post Brexit agreement, the Windsor framework. How have businesses been reacting? Many companies are working together to figure out how to navigate the tariffs, what it will mean for supply chains, increased costs, exploring new markets and avoiding laying people off. The Advanced Technologies in Manufacturing Cluster (ATIM) in the midlands comprises of over 70 members spanning engineering, polymer, food and drink, medical devices, and technology solutions. Some companies have been hit more than others depending on where their main exporting base was, according to ATIM Manager Caitriona Mordan. "I know for example one company within the spirits side, they would have been historically an Irish brand, and they have tried to mitigate against some of those tariffs, even with the 10%, but they have now relocated to the US," said Ms Mordan. She noted that some of the main issues they're actively working on include progressing trade in new markets such as Canada, and other less traditional markets like the Middle East and South America, company restructuring, how to mitigate losses and manage tight margins as well as avoiding having to lay off staff. "Things are certainly slowing down, but I think Irish companies are resilient. They do need financial supports from government as well as those supports for market discovery to new markets as well," explained Ms Mordan. "Mullingar is steeped in Irish owned, indigenous manufacturing companies, which is a rarity. "But if you begin to get that ripple where you're laying people off, it has huge impact on the wider economies that we're trying to really bolster as well, and that's ultimately detrimental. "So, we're really trying to work with them and it's that peer-to-peer piece of how we're supporting each other, how we're tapping into new markets and how they're learning." Neill McDonnell, CEO Irish Small and Medium Enterprises Association said: "Uncertainty is actually the killer of business confidence and business plans." "In an environment where you can't say with a degree of certainty what the cost base on your side and the buyer's side is going to look like in the medium term, it's impossible to borrow money, for example."
Irish Times
12 hours ago
- Irish Times
How Ireland's economic future is being carved up in talks in the White House
Well you didn't expect it to be straightforward, did you? Irish companies have spent the past few days scrambling to try to understand the impact of Donald Trump's tariffs on their exports to the US and work out what might happen next. Despite the headline deal between the EU and the US, much remains to be settled. In the middle of all this, one thing is clear. Vital negotiations are under way in Washington between big American multinationals and the US president and these are going to have a big impact on Ireland. The State's exposure to a small number of big US firms in terms of corporation tax and employment is well known – so how the big pharma companies and tech giants respond to Trump's cajoling and bullying will be vital. As these deals are being done in Washington, Ireland can only look on. The boss of Apple , one of the Republic's biggest employers and taxpayers, called to the White House this week to pay homage to the chief and promise $100 billion (a nice round number) in new investment in the US - to add to the $500 billion it has already pledged. Analysts, scrambling to work out how this will change the company's structures, believe its chief executive Tim Cook may still be able to retain the supply chains that have guaranteed nice profit margins. How this – or the impact of pressure from Trump on Intel's new chief executive – might affect their Irish operations is far from clear. The best hope is not very much – that the chief executives will pander to Trump a bit, protect as much of their operations as they can and then wait him out. But the point is that Ireland is uniquely vulnerable to decisions made around a dozen US boardrooms and on the interactions of these firms with a volatile and unpredictable president. READ MORE Nowhere is this clearer than in the vital pharma sector. The headlines are about Trump's threats of 150 per cent tariffs in a year or two's time, or maybe 250 per cent, or whatever you are having yourself. The real action is behind the scenes. Here, the big pharma companies are trying to reach an agreement with Trump on pricing in the US market. This is running parallel with his drive to attract the manufacture of key drugs and ingredients back to the US. [ Tariffs: what do Trump's latest pharma threats mean for Ireland? Opens in new window ] As ever with Trump, there are contradictions in the goals he is trying to achieve, so we will have to see where this lands. Trump's tariff threats on pharma run counter to his desire for lower prices. Interestingly, for now EU pharma exports to the US do not look to be facing immediate tariffs. Clarification from US Customs indicates that pharma is on a list to remain zero rated for now, according to Carol Lynch, a customs partner with BDO. However, the sector may well face some charge when Trump announces the results of a separate investigation into the sector shortly. This could be of 15 per cent, though this is not clear. The backdrop to this are the active discussions between the White House and big pharma companies on the pricing issue as part of Trump's agenda to drive down US drug prices – which are notoriously high – to the lowest levels available elsewhere. This could involve the pharma companies charging more in other countries, including in the EU, as a rebalancing exercise. They are also looking for concessions from Europe on the way they are reimbursed for new drugs coming on to the market. [ Irish exporters 'told to shut their mouths' over Trump tariffs Opens in new window ] Unlike the half-baked madness of much of his policy, Trump has a point here. Drug companies have arranged their affairs not only to drag huge profits out of the US market, but also to pay tax on this in countries like Ireland, where the charge is lower. Work by economist Brad Setser of the Council on Foreign Relations in the US shows how the big six US pharma companies combined set aside no funds to pay tax to the US exchequer in 2023. Zero. This is despite the vast bulk of their revenues coming from the US market, where prices are on average almost three times higher than the OECD average, according to a 2022 study undertaken on behalf of the US government, with the biggest gap being for the kind of high-value branded drugs and their ingredients made in Ireland. Ironically, the 2017 tax reforms introduced when Trump was first in office increased the tax incentive for pharma firms to invest abroad and keep some key intellectual property assets in countries like Ireland. Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' – his new tax plan – will do nothing to address this. These trends have been hugely to Ireland's advantage in recent years, but now create a vulnerability, as things that get way out of line generally do. There is a risk of less investment here by pharma over the next few years. And also of changed pricing practices which lead to less profit being declared in Ireland and thus less corporate tax paid here. [ Apple's new investment in US may be just enough to appease Trump, for now at least Opens in new window ] Ireland might settle for some loss here, if Trump held off threats of massive and disruptive tariffs in the years ahead. While the EU feels it has a deal to keep all tariffs to a maximum of 15 per cent, Trump's recent comments suggest he thinks otherwise. But, like in microchips, he might spare those who fall in with his demands to invest in the US – or in the case of pharma cut prices. Trump's direct dealings with big players vital to our economic future adds to the uncertainty about the economic outlook. Tariffs are not the only economic weapon at his disposal. He is also relying on arm-twisting and the 'power' which the US government has via the goods it purchases and its ability to set the ground rules through regulation. That said, big pharma and big tech are powerful players and have cards to play too Ireland won't get to choose how all the deals are worked out. The future shape of the trading world is being carved up in the White House between a capricious president and amoral multinationals who care nothing for his agenda, but will play along in their own interest. Ireland's hope will be that it can continue to position itself as an ongoing trusted supplier and investment home to the US – that we are accepted as part of the supply chain which ends up in the US. The Government will try to diversify trade, too. But we have an awful lot of eggs in Uncle Sam's basket and a lot at stake as Donald Trump tries to get the big multinationals to do his bidding.
Irish Times
12 hours ago
- Irish Times
Germans told to work more, as citizens make most of holidays
Once upon a time, Germans were world champions in cars, soccer and music. As the summer season kicks in, however, a new report suggests Germans' core competences now lie in work-avoidance and holidays . Even the famed tradition of German efficiency appears to have adapted, with a visible research boom into how best to optimise rest and relaxation (R&R). Despite all this, many here were furious when new chancellor Friedrich Merz suggested his fellow citizens needed to work more. READ MORE 'We won't be able to hold our standard of living with the four-day week and work-life balance,' said Merz to a recent audience of nodding German managers. They had all read a new report showing Germans work on average 33.2 hours weekly, two hours less than the EU weekly average. Another OECD report of annual hours worked put Germans, on 1,340 hours, at the bottom of the European pile: compared to 1,659 hours in Ireland, 1,810 hours in the US and 1,882 hours in Greece. Some say the average statistics are skewed by how 29 per cent of Germans are employed part-time, well above the EU average of 17 per cent. [ German chancellor insists coalition 'not in crisis' after second Bundestag calamity in two months Opens in new window ] New German chancellor Friedrich Merz suggested his fellow citizens needed to work more. Photograph: Clemens Bilan/ EPA Either way, employers are alarmed given productivity is sliding even faster than the wider economy. Even with 31 days of statutory leave and seven national holidays, the average German worker takes 19 additional days' sick leave annually – more than half their statutory maximum of six weeks' paid sick leave. Another survey calculated the average number of sick days at 15, but even that marks a two thirds rise on a decade ago. The OECD work report prompted a fortnight of 'are we too lazy?' headlines and hand-wringing. Then most Germans headed off on their holidays regardless, many clutching a copy of Der Spiegel magazine with the cover story: 'The Holiday Formula: how researchers sound out the secrets of rest and relaxation'. Many experts in the booming area of R&R research suggest one reason so many people feel permanently exhausted is because our holiday habits have failed to keep up with massive changes to our working lives, where laptops and smartphones have increased efficiency and expectations. 'The intensification of work doesn't just make us more in need of rest and recovery, it also inhibits our actual ability to recover,' argues Prof Gerhard Blasche, a clinical psychologist at the University of Vienna, pioneer in rest and author of Take a Break. He argues that keeping about 10 per cent of the working day for breaks prevents exhaustion, something that is particularly necessary in the rush to complete tasks ahead of a holiday. Once on leave, however, he sees no quick, all-purpose R&R hacks given individual needs, means and opportunity. [ Workforce productivity in Irish economy falls by most in EU, latest data shows Opens in new window ] Fellow R&R researcher Jessica de Bloom argues that longer breaks do not result in a provably longer, positive effect on our health and wellbeing. Her recent study found that day eight is most often the high point on our personal 'holiday-happiness curve'. 'It's better to travel four times for a week than once for four weeks,' said Prof de Bloom to Der Spiegel. She also recommends returning to work midweek, with the next weekend around the corner, to minimise post-holiday stress. A final study finding: hikers after an active break tended to have a better mental state than those on poolside cocktail-and-book breaks. The wider benefits are clear: more Germans up a mountain means fewer at the pool. Whether this translates into fewer Germans using towels to reserve sun loungers is a subject worthy of scientific study. Whenever, that is, the Germans get back to work.
