Key info
- Where: European Parliament
- Format: the event will be open to outside participants upon registration.
- When: 11th December, 16:30-18:00 CEST. Will be followed by an informal cocktail.
- Language: English, French and Italian translation.
Background
In recent weeks, so-called “innovative solutions” for migration have gained renewed strong political attention from Member States, with different proposals ranging from return hubs in third countries, revising the Return Directive to expanding the use of “safe country” concept. Meanwhile the Italy-Albania protocol has started being implemented and has immediately faced legal and practical hurdles. The European elections in June 2024 reaffirmed that the external dimension of migration remains a high political priority. The new Commissioners also confirmed this intention, with Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration Magnus Brunner claiming to be open to “innovative solutions” on migration management while stressing the focus on the implementation of the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum. At the same time, Dubravka Šuica, for the new Mediterranean Commissioner portfolio, has been mandated to lead efforts in “operationalizing” the EU’s migration policy, forging “comprehensive partnerships” across the Mediterranean as part of a broader Agenda for the Mediterranean focused on economic stability, energy, transport, security, and migration, among other shared interests.
The recent “blueprint” deals with Tunisia, Egypt, Mauritania, and Lebanon illustrate how migration has become a pivotal focus of the EU’s relationships with Mediterranean partners. These agreements, often brokered with substantial influence from a few Member States in concertation with the European Commission, have sometimes bypassed the EEAS and the European Parliament. These new engagement modalities signal a structural shift in the EU’s foreign policy approach, amid growing weariness with the European Neighbourhood Policy, in which short-term considerations are taking primacy over long-term objectives.
Despite the insistence on the novelty of these so-called “solutions”, most of these proposals are anything but new: debates on ‘hubs’ located outside the European Union have existed for years and have always met significant legal and practical challenges in implementation due to the complex geopolitical relations they entail, and the high risk of non-compliance with fundamental human rights. Similarly, the “safe country” concept, in use since 2015 in European asylum policy, has long drawn criticism from civil society organisations for insufficient safeguards to protect fundamental rights. But what are the political, legal and human costs of these policy developments? And how is the EU’s foreign policy affected by the block position on migration?
In many of the countries often considered “safe” the human rights and rule of law context is rapidly worsening. In Tunisia, the authoritarian grip of the President was sealed in the latest election, while the situation for migrants and refugees is alarming, with reports of mass expulsions, hate speech and physical aggressions on the rise. In Egypt, repression against civil society and human rights defenders, arbitrary arrests, mass detention and extra-judicial killings remain key concerns while the upcoming national asylum law will vastly worsen an already severe situation for asylum seekers and refugees in the country. Finally, despite the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, some Member States are pushing for the normalisation of relations with Assad and for the returns of Syrian refugees. The EU’s reliance on migration management as a core element of its cooperation with third countries is risky, as shown by the complicated implementation of the MoU with Tunisia. Moreover, it undermines the EU’s broader aims for regional stability and human development.
In this scenario, what strategies can be leveraged to oppose these trends? What role can the European Parliament and civil society play?
Join us in this event hosted by the Greens/EFA group at the European Parliament where we’ll discuss these points and reflect on ways forward.