Migrant crisis casts shadow on Starmer-Macron summit
The issue will feature during a state visit to Britain by French President Emmanuel Macron starting Tuesday and new measures to curb the dangerous journeys are expected to be announced on Thursday following talks with Prime Minister Keir Starmer.
More than 21,000 migrants have crossed from northern France to southeast England in rudimentary vessels this year, providing a massive headache for Starmer as the far-right soars in popularity.
Images of overloaded vessels leaving French beaches with law enforcement officers appearing to just watch on exasperate UK politicians and the unforgiving tabloid press.
"We pay for French cops' buggy, 4x4s and drones, but migrants still sailing," complained The Sun newspaper on Wednesday, in a reference to the so-called Sandhurst Treaty.
The 2018 agreement, that runs until 2027, sees Britain finance actions taken in France to stop the migrants.
Starmer, who led his Labour party to a sweeping victory in an election last year following 14 years of Conservative rule, has vowed to "take back control" of Britain's borders.
- One in, one out -
But in the first six months of 2025, there was a 48 percent increase in the number of people arriving on small boats compared to last year, with the government blaming extended dry weather.
The annual record of 45,774 reached in 2022 could be broken this year, which would deal a massive blow to Starmer as Eurosceptic Nigel Farage's Reform UK party leads national polls.
A new border control law going through Britain's parliament would give law enforcement counter-terror style powers to combat people-smuggling gangs.
The UK has also signed agreements with countries on migrant transit routes, including Iraq, Serbia, and Germany.
But Starmer needs strengthened cooperation with France, and key announcements were expected following their talks.
Under pressure from London, Paris is considering tweaking its laws to allow police to intercept migrant boats up to 300 metres from France's shoreline. Currently, French law enforcement only intervene at sea to rescue passengers at risk of drowning.
The two governments are also working on a migrant exchange programme.
A pilot project would see Britain capable of returning to France someone who has crossed the Channel by boat, according to several media sources.
France in exchange could deport an equivalent number of people to Britian, provided they have the right to live there, such as through family reunification.
Paris wants to expand the agreement to the European Union so that readmissions can be shared among several countries.
According to Britain's interior ministry, migrants who crossed the Channel between March 2024 and March 2025 were mainly Afghans, Syrians, Eritreans, Iranians, and Sudanese.
French officials have claimed that Britain attracts migrants because the lack of a national identity card makes it easier to work illegally.
Starmer's government has cracked down on illegal work -- arrests increased by 51 percent from July 2024 to the end of May, compared to the previous year, it says.
- Seeking 'safety' -
But Peter Walsh, a researcher at Oxford University's Migration Observatory, doubts that it is easier to work illegally in Britain than in France.
"You have to demonstrate that you have the right to work. If an employer doesn't carry out those checks, then they can face serious sanctions, fines and imprisonment. That's the same in France and the UK," he told AFP.
Walsh believes the English language and presence of family members in Britain are key attractions, as well as Britain's departure from the European Union.
"If you've claimed asylum in the EU and been refused, you can actually come to the UK and have another shot because we will not know that you've actually been refused in the EU," he said.
Rishan Tsegay, 26, originally from Eritrea, arrived in England in 2015 hidden in the back of a lorry. She fled from Sudan through Libya, Italy and France.
Last year, she became a British citizen and now works as a nurse.
Tsegay says there is a "hostile environment" towards irregular migrants in Britain, saying they were often presented as "criminals" rather than people "contributing to society".
She wants Starmer and Macron to focus on improving safe routes for migrants fleeing war-torn countries as a way to stop them risking the Channel crossings.
"These people come here to seek safety," Tsegay insisted.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Benjamin Netanyahu sends stern letters to 'weak' leaders recognising Palestine
Israel 's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has lashed out at the leaders of France and Australia in personal letters condemning their plans to recognise Palestine. In similarly worded broadsides, Mr Netanyahu accused the French President Emmanuel Macron and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese of fuelling anti-Semitism by backing a Palestinian state. His spat with Mr Albanese has escalated after Australia denied visas to hardline Israeli figures, prompting Israel to retaliate by barring diplomats. On Tuesday, Mr Netanyahu described the Australian leader as "a weak politician who betrayed Israel and abandoned Australia's Jews". Mr Macron has also been a target of Israeli anger after he announced in July that France would recognise Palestine, triggering similar announcements by Britain, Canada and others. Several plan to make recognition official when the UN General Assembly meets next month. In his letter to Mr Macron, which was seen by AFP, Mr Netanyahu said anti-Jewish hatred was on the rise in France. "Your call for a Palestinian state pours fuel on this anti-Semitic fire. It is not diplomacy, it is appeasement," he wrote. "It rewards Hamas terror, hardens Hamas's refusal to free the hostages, emboldens those who menace French Jews and encourages the Jew-hatred now stalking your streets." The letter to Mr Albanese, which was revealed by Sky News Australia, mentioned a spate of incidents at Jewish sites in Australia, which Mr Netanyahu said were part of a "campaign of intimidation". He called on both leaders to "replace weakness with action, appeasement with resolve, and to do so by a clear date: the Jewish New Year, September 23". That is also when world leaders begin taking the floor at the UN General Assembly. There was no immediate reaction from France or Australia. Mr Albanese said last week that the Israeli leader was "in denial" about the humanitarian situation in Gaza. Mr Netanyahu, who has positioned himself as a firm opponent of a Palestinian state, has alarmed foreign leaders by planning to expand the war despite the already dire conditions in Gaza. Israeli troops have been instructed to capture Gaza city as a first step to retaking control of the strip. The US also rejects the idea of statehood and last month announced sanctions on Palestinian officials in apparent retaliation at the growing momentum behind a state.
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Apple defeats UK order that would give law enforcement access to encrypted user data
Apple has secured a victory in defeating a proposed mandate from the British government that would have required the company to provide backdoor access to user data uploaded to the cloud. The February order from the British government that mandated access to data, including encrypted data on cloud services, provoked fury from the US tech industry, which has accused the UK of Orwellian practices in policing online content. 'Over the past few months, I've been working closely with our partners in the UK, alongside President Trump and Vice President Vance to ensure Americans' private data remains private and our Constitutional rights and civil liberties are protected,' Tulsi Gabbard, US director of National Intelligence, announced on X on Tuesday. 'As a result, the UK has agreed to drop its mandate for Apple to provide a 'back door' that would have enabled access to the protected encrypted data of American citizens.' Technology tycoon and entrepreneur Elon Musk responded to Ms Gabbard's post with an arm flex emoji. Mr Musk has been highly critical of British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and his Labour Party over the backdoor data access policy. Apple has not yet responded to The National's requests for a comment on this story. According to The Washington Post, which first broke the story about the law colloquially known as the 'Snoopers' Charter', the proposed legislation would have made it a criminal offence for a company to reveal that the government had made a request to access data. The policy push is not unique to the UK, with police and security services around the world advocating for more access to encrypted communications in recent years, warning that encryption can benefit criminals. For Apple, the matter has proven to be particularly sensitive, given the company's significant marketing emphasis on user privacy. In 2016, the US-based consumer technology company challenged a federal magistrate's order to unlock an iPhone used in the San Bernardino, California, terrorist attack. At the time, Apple chief executive Tim Cook argued that such a move would undermine encryption by creating a backdoor that could potentially be used on other future devices. 'The government is asking Apple to hack our own users and undermine decades of security advancements that protect our customers – including tens of millions of American citizens – from sophisticated hackers and cybercriminals,' he said. 'We can find no precedent for an American company being forced to expose its customers to a greater risk of attack.' He added that the demand threatened the security of Apple's customers and had 'implications far beyond the legal case at hand'. During prosecution, the FBI announced that it had found its own way to access the iPhone data for the accused terror suspects. As far back as 2010, when Apple's co-founder Steve Jobs was still at the helm of the company, Apple was considered to be significantly more stringent than other Silicon Valley companies when it came to protecting user privacy. 'A lot of people think we're old fashioned about this,' Mr Jobs said during the D8 conference that same year. 'We take privacy extremely seriously.' Some, however, have questioned whether Apple's commitment to privacy is more style than substance, and whether it is just an attempt to sell more devices and services. 'Privacy … that's iPhone,' the advertisement concludes.
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Europe faces $1 trillion military bill to match US might on continent
President Donald Trump is offering security guarantees for Ukraine and the wider European region as part of a peace process, which prompts the question: what is the US military's role on the continent worth? Removing American might from the European equation raises queries over how much dozens of countries can invest to match the level of military readiness on offer today. The cost for Europe 's defence in the event of a US military withdrawal following a Ukraine peace deal would be $1 trillion, according to a think tank. That estimated total cost above $1 trillion would stem from the boosting of defence spending back to Cold War levels in terms of individual nations' GDP. The IISS estimate covers both one-off procurement outlays of almost $400 billion as well as support and associated costs over a 25-year assumed lifespan. The additional purchases would be triggered as a first step during a 'window of vulnerability' in which a dramatic increase in defence spending would be needed just to stand still. This means building 600 tanks and 10 nuclear submarines and adding 400 fighter jets, the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) said. That would need to be done at speed to meet a resurgent Russian threat, with the likelihood that Moscow would have reconstituted its forces by 2027. Russia's economy is already on a war footing, so it has the ability to produce 2,700 attack drones a month, and has an army that is experienced in modern warfare. Europe's Nato states have promised to increase their defence budgets from 2 per cent to 3 per cent of GDP. The bill would suddenly go much higher if the US started to withdraw 128,000 service personnel and their kit to concentrate on the Indo-Pacific region. As US Vice President JD Vance has said, Europe must 'step up in a big way to provide for its own defence'. This will require the continent's powers to 'reduce dependencies on the US and, in extremis, to prepare for a Nato without any US role', the IISS report stated. Fighter jets The most expensive single item would be the purchase of 400 tactical combat aircraft, and training the pilots to fly them. But having many more squadrons of F-35 stealth fighters, Eurofighters and F-16s would give Europe a significant edge over Russia's depleted air force. This new air armada would cost up to $64 billion but Europe would also need other aircraft currently supplied by the US, including 15 P-8 Poseidon submarine hunters ($4.8 billion) and 200 attack helicopters, such as the Apache ($12 billion). It would at the very least need a further 50 Reaper combat drones ($3 billion), given the game-changing impact of drones in the Ukraine-Russia war. All its aircraft would need missiles, from Meteor air-to-air weapons to Storm Shadow cruise missiles, with a further 7,000 required at a high end cost of $16 billion. Tanks and missiles With drones making armoured warfare a much trickier undertaking, the 600 extra main battle tanks ($18 billion) required, such as the US-made Abrams or German Leopard 2, would also need to be more resilient. Infantry fighting vehicles, which have proven their worth in Ukraine by protecting troops and providing firepower, would be a priority. A further 2,400 of all types would be necessary, costing $25 billion. Given the importance of artillery, far more will be required, with at least 100 guns ($2.2 billion) and many more short or medium-range missiles such at the US-supplied Atacms, which have proven effective in Ukraine. A total of 400 Atacms would be needed, as well as 27 extra air-defence batteries, such as the Patriot ($35 billion), which have been vital in defending Ukraine's civilians and infrastructure. Essentially, on land the continent would need an additional three armoured divisions to cover the US absence. Warships and subs A war at sea will require significant European upgrades to combat Moscow's powerful Northern Fleet in the North Sea and Baltic Sea. An additional 10 nuclear submarines ($22 billion), such as the British-made Astute class, would be required, even though they take a decade to build, along with a destroyer force of 20 extra ships ($50 billion). A further four aircraft carriers would be necessary at a cost of $13.6 billion. These will all need more missiles, from cruise to air defence and torpedoes totalling $25 billion, according to the IISS estimate. Arms budgets Given that much of the above will take years to assemble, alongside willingness among European powers to finance it, the continent would face a 'considerable window of vulnerability' without US support, the report said. Therefore, it might not have 'much time to prepare for a Russian threat to allied territory' and would face 'a wide range of capability gaps'. Europe would face stark choices on how to fill them, especially with aircraft production at global aerospace factories already at high capacity. In the short term this would be 'very challenging', but given a few more years it 'would not be an impossible task', the authors suggested.
