What was considered taboo just a few years ago is now being discussed in concrete terms. Among the proposals that took center stage in Copenhagen are:
- the establishment of return hubs outside the EU
- Deportations to countries without a family or personal connection
- Fast-track procedure for asylum applications from safe countries of origin
- Extension of the list of safe countries of origin
- Restriction of legal options for rejected applications
- Increased border protection and cooperation with third countries on returns
Asylum: Returns to safe third countries
A key topic was the so-called Return Directive, which the EU Commission presented back in March. It stipulates that asylum seekers can be deported to countries to which they have no personal connection - i.e. no family, no previous residence.
Interior Minister Dobrindt also wants to completely remove this so-called "connecting element": "Protection by the EU does not necessarily mean protection in the EU," he explained.
In concrete terms, this means that anyone who cannot return to their country of origin (example: Afghanistan) will in future be deported to a nearby third country classified as safe (such as Pakistan) - even without prior personal contact.
A return to a safe third country that the person seeking protection has crossed on their way to the EUwould therefore also be conceivable.
It is similar to the Rwanda model in the UK. In this model, asylum seekers are deported to the African country and are supposed to apply for asylum from there. If they are successful, they are allowed to stay in Rwanda.
List of safe third countries - fewer chances of asylum
At the same time, the EU Commission wants to expand the list of safe third countries. A corresponding bill has also been drafted in Germany. In future, the federal government will be able to classify countries of origin as "safe" without the approval of the Bundestag or Bundesrat.
This would have a direct impact on the chances of many asylum seekers: procedures could be completed more quickly and asylum applications could be rejected more frequently.
Repatriation centers planned outside the EU
Another key point is so-called "return hubs" - repatriation centers outside the EU. Rejected asylum seekers are to be housed there until they can be deported. It is also conceivable that refugees could be brought there while the asylum procedure is still ongoing.
Dobrindt described the model as "absolutely necessary". Both a joint European approach and cooperation between individual member states are conceivable.
France, Austria, Denmark, Poland and the Czech Republic also support the proposal. The centers are to be operated in coordination with Frontex and legally secured through agreements with third countries.
Billions for border protection, pressure on third countries
The EU wants to provide significantly more money to implement the stricter migration policy: the draft budget provides for 34 billion euros for migration, border protection and internal security - three times the previous budget.
Funding for Frontex is also to be drastically increased. Frontex is the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. It supports the EU member states in managing their external borders and combating cross-border crime.
The aim is to coordinate returns better and faster, prevent irregular migration and exchange data more efficiently with third countries.
Migration: agreements with third countries
In order for return centers and deportations to third countries to be possible at all, agreements with the respective countries outside the EU are needed. EU Commissioner Magnus Brunner proposes linking migration issues to trade partnerships in future.
That would mean: Anyone who wants to cooperate economically with the EU would have to be prepared to cooperate with repatriations or asylum procedures in return.
Implementation remains difficult - example Libya
However, a recent example shows how difficult such cooperation is in reality: According to media reports - including the FAZ - an EU delegation led by Commissioner Brunner was recently turned away in Libya. The group wanted to negotiate migration agreements, but was declared "undesirable" and had to leave the country.
Repatriation also remains difficult within the EU. According to the EU Asylum Agency, around half of all asylum applications are rejected - but only around one in four people who are required to leave the EU do so.
Conclusion: projects meet with criticism
The EU plans are accompanied by growing criticism: the UN Refugee Agency and human rights organizations are warning of a creeping reduction in protection standards for asylum seekers.
UN Human Rights Commissioner Volker Türk was particularly critical of the deportations to Afghanistan and called for an immediate stop. The idea of placing asylum seekers in detention-like conditions in third countries also raises concerns - both legal and humanitarian.
