EU ministers push for returns to Syria and Afghanistan at high-altitude summit
The self-styled 'coalition of the willing' led by German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt and joined by France, Poland, Austria, Denmark, Czechia as well as EU Home Affairs Commissioner Magnus Brunner, signed off on a hardline declaration calling for tougher migration rules across the EU.
The group wants faster and easier return mechanisms for irregular migrants and insists that deportations to Afghanistan and Syria 'must be possible'. The declaration also called for Frontex's mandate to be strengthened to assist EU countries with returns to hubs in third countries, including a mandate to conduct returns from third countries such as the Western Balkans.
Earlier on Friday, Berlin deported a group of convicted criminals to Taliban-run Afghanistan, the first such deportation since 2024 and the first one under Merz's government. Returns and deportations are a "gap in the reorganisation of the migration system," Dobrindt said, adding it was "where we need to do more".
His Austrian counterpart Gerhard Karner struck a triumphant tone after the meeting, pointing to 'new opportunities' recently created.
Austria in early July deported a convicted man to Syria in an EU first after the fall of the Assad regime, and Germany follows suit with deportations to Afghanistan.
'These are all enormously important steps toward a credible asylum policy in Europe, if we can also return criminals to their countries of origin,' Karner said.
Back in December, Brussels had still taken a far more cautious line. The European Commission reaffirmed its position then that, despite political changes in Syria, the conditions for safe, voluntary, and dignified returns were still not in place, echoing the assessment of the UN refugee agency.
Member states also committed to 'carefully analyse' European Court of Human Rights rulings on asylum, a nod to the Danish-Italian letter that helped spark the current debate. EU ministers will reconvene next week in full 27-member format for the informal Justice and Home Affairs meeting in Copenhagen, where subjects including irregular migration and beefing up the return system are high on the agenda.
(vib)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euractiv
an hour ago
- Euractiv
INTERVIEW: Return hubs are ‘not easy to do', says former Commissioner Schinas
Margaritis Schinas served as a European Commission Vice-President from 2019 to 2024 and was a key architect of the fiercely debated New Pact on Migration and Asylum. Now out of the EU limelight, he speaks to Euractiv about the political minefield of implementation – and the bloc's major shift on migration. 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)
Euractiv
2 hours ago
- Euractiv
UK denies Fico's election meddling claim
BRATISLAVA – The UK has firmly rejected Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico's claim that it interfered in Slovakia's 2023 election, after Fico threatened to raise the issue with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and EU leaders. Late Tuesday, the British Embassy in Slovakia issued a firm denial. "Any claim that the United Kingdom sought to influence the outcome of the election or encourage people to vote for or against a particular political party is completely untrue,' Embassy's spokeswoman Monika Holečková told Slovak outlet 'This activity was aimed at encouraging young people to participate in the democratic process in their countries by participating in elections, regardless of their political affiliation or support," Holečková added. Earlier that day, Fico told a press conference that London had paid 'journalists, activists, and influencers' to sway public opinion against his party, Smer-SD, and in favour of the opposition party Progressive Slovakia in an election his party ultimately won. He cited an article published by the British investigative outlet Declassified UK on 16 July. Without presenting further evidence, Fico spoke of a 'deliberate, intentional act by a foreign power with some journalists and political influencers' to influence the vote. Slovakia's foreign ministry has summoned the British ambassador for a meeting on Wednesday. Fico warned that if the ambassador failed to provide a satisfactory explanation, he would write an open letter to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and personally contact other EU leaders. 'Our interest is not to escalate tensions, but to clarify the situation,' he said. Author rejects Fico's version The article in question alleges that UK-funded media agency Zinc Network Ltd paid influencers across Central and Eastern Europe to encourage young people to vote – a region it describes as a 'key battleground in the information war with Russia'. Influencers were asked to post content approved by the British Foreign Office. But speaking to Denník N, Williams rejected claims that the UK influenced Slovak elections in favour of any specific political party. 'My investigation showed that influencers on social media were paid to post videos aimed at mobilising young voters ahead of the 2023 elections. It was not an explicit partisan campaign nor support for any particular party,' Williams said. He also dismissed Fico's claim that journalists were involved: 'As far as I know, no journalists were involved in this operation. Therefore, it would be wrong to accuse journalists in this case.' Williams added that the campaign appeared to be a call for electoral participation and support for democracy. (de)
Euractiv
2 hours ago
- Euractiv
Silvio Berlusconi haunts Germany's media scene
BERLIN – A brief wave of political nostalgia swept through the German government's press briefing in Berlin this week, when a spokesperson announced that Silvio Berlusconi would be the next high-profile guest to visit Friedrich Merz's Chancellery. One problem: the longest-serving prime minister of post-war Italy died two years ago – as a member of the press corps quickly pointed out. In fact, it's not Silvio, but his son Pier Silvio Berlusconi who's been invited to Berlin to discuss his family's attempt to take over Germany's second-largest private media company, ProSiebenSat.1, via the late patriarch's media empire, MediaForEurope (MFE). The plans initially surfaced in March, but MFE announced on Monday that it would raise its offer to stakeholders to take full control of the company, in which it currently holds a 30% stake. The move has aggravated concerns about the editorial direction of ProsiebenSat.1, which operates two of Germany's largest private broadcasters, prompting rare interference from Berlin. 'A change of ownership must not lead to a restriction of journalistic independence,' warned Germany's Commissioner for Culture and the Media, Wolfram Weimer. He said that he had invited Berlusconi, as it was important to review "who is behind" the takeover of "such an important institution". The bid has revived the spectre of Silvio Berlusconi – the four-term prime minister, media magnate, and former owner of the football club AC Milan. The German press long viewed his string of private and political scandals from afar, often with a mixture of fascination and disdain. In the late 2000s, as EU countries like Italy struggled under billion-euro debt burdens, frugal Germans were bewildered by the repeated electoral success of Berlusconi and his centre-right party, now known as Forza Italia. That frustration was rooted not only in his stubborn reluctance to reform Italy's debt-laden economy, but also in Berlusconi's repeated legal entanglements, including allegations of tax fraud and bribery – such as paying hush money over his infamous 'bunga bunga' sex parties. He denied all charges. Independence at stake? These days, the focus of German concerns over MFE's takeover bid is less about Berlusconi's scandal-strewn party lifestyle and more about media impartiality. 'We have been warning about the takeover by Berlusconi's heirs for some time now,' said Mika Beuster, chair of the German Journalists Association (DJV) . In the 1990s and 2000s, Berlusconi's broadcasters, such as Italia 1 and TG4, were known – and often criticised – for steering their editorial lines toward a right-wing or pro-Berlusconi direction. The media empire is still considered to be close to Forza Italia, while Berlusconi himself had good relations with Russia's pariah president, Vladimir Putin, which is now raising eyebrows in Germany. Beuster from the DJV said he was "concerned about jobs in journalism, and on the other hand, because of the troubling proximity of MFE media to right-wing populist positions." Pier Silvio Berlusconi has attempted to assuage such concerns though his reassurances have been met with scepticism. MFE, he said, was not seeking 'total control', but rather a stake that would allow the company to 'provide a clear direction, grounded in a joint vision'. While it would not be easy for the German government to stop a takeover, Berlusconi will need to persuade stakeholders and best the Czech investment conglomerate PPF Group, which currently holds a 15% stake in ProSiebenSat.1 and is looking to increase it. *Nicoletta Ionta contributed reporting. (aw, jp)
