“As the EU seeks to externalise its borders & migration problems”

By Fortune Madondo

“Migration is a European challenge which must be met with a European solution. One that is effective, fair and firm. This is what the Pact on Migration and Asylum delivers – more secure external borders, solidarity between Member States and more efficient procedures for asylum and return. And to address the root causes of migration together, we continue to strengthen our relationships with global partners”, Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission.

What Is The New European Union (EU) Pact On Migration & Asylum?

The new European Union (EU) Pact on migration and asylum policy is a set of ten (10) pieces of binding legislation, a standardised framework adopted in 2024 for all EU member states on handling irregular migration and border security.

“The Vote”

On the 17th of June, 2026, the European Parliament held a major plenary session, which included several vital legislative votes being held in this particular Strasbourg plenary session. And one of them (the vote) was on EU Returns Regulations. After the voting and results were announced, the EU Parliament broke out in a chant. ” _Send them back, send them back”,_ the chant was loud and clear,  especially so, when 418 voted in favour, 218 voted against, and 30 abstained, from this new “hard & tight” immigration and asylum policy.

“Today, Europe delivered. People rightly expect that those with no right to stay return to their countries of origin. That’s why I have one clear priority: effective, realistic return measures. And after almost 20 years of standstill, Europe finally has them. Return is the final piece in Europe’s migration system, and I’m hugely proud it’s now in place”, Rapporteur Malik Azmani (Renew, Netherlands) said.

The New System: What The EU Actually Passed.

1. Mutual Recognition

The new law states that once someone is given a deportation order in one EU member state, the deportation order applies to all EU member states. Unlike the previous law, when a migrant received a deportation order, he/she could simply move to another EU state to avoid deportation.

•  “Return hubs” outside EU borders

Twenty- seven (27) EU states can now send failed asylum seekers to detention/deportation centres in third countries while awaiting return. Unaccompanied minors excluded.

• Broader detention powers

Longer detention, electronic monitoring, financial guarantees, and designated residence requirements.

• Faster deportations

Accelerated border procedures. Lower threshold for declaring non-EU countries “safe” to reject claims as inadmissible.

• Assertive migration diplomacy

The EU’s Jan 29, 2026, strategy links visas, trade, and aid to migration cooperation. “Prevent illegal migration” and “break smuggling networks” are top priorities.

•  Responsibility & solidarity

All EU member states come to the help of “Frontline” countries, basically border countries at the front of migration problems, like Italy, Greece, etc. Other EU member states are coming to the assistance of these countries, facing much of the migration problem.

• Solidarity with borders

Third countries outside the EU, like Egypt and Tunisia, are expected to hold migrants or accept “return hubs” in their territories, as “Frontline states” help the EU with a migration problem.

What does The Pact give the EU?

1. EU member states now have the power to refuse relocations legally. This is now in contrast to the “Dublin system”, where most EU member states were stuck.
2. EU member states have the power to fast- track rejections at the border.
3. EU member states have the power to deport quickly and detain longer. This can be done in the form of detention, which is allowed up to 12 weeks. Furthermore, appeals no longer suspend deportation.
4. The Pact gives Europe the right to approach third countries for the purpose of setting ” return hubs”.
5. As part of what is termed “Assertive Migration Diplomacy”, the EU has the power to use Visas, Trade, Aid as migration weapons and force third countries to accept deportees.
6. The EU now has the power to declare a “migration crisis” and suspend rules.

How can The Pact impact Africa?

1. Africa has more increased responsibility to take care of unwanted EU migrants.
2. Africa becomes a dumping deportation zone for the EU. The EU would have successfully exported its border problems.
3. Africa loses out on its resources, Africa taxpayers’ money covers the cost of running “return hubs”.
4. The EU sets the rules, Africa takes policing responsibilities of the “return hubs”, not a creation of Africa but Europe.
5. Europe corrects its electoral problems due to the rise in right-wing political movements, and Africa gets “hubs” -essentially detention centres, aid, trade with conditions tied to migration issues and displaced people.
6. Africa faces intra- continental pressure as the EU shuts out migrants. In some cases, it would end up fuelling xenophobia, like in South Africa.
7. With legal doors closed, migrants attempting to cross to the EU uses risk deadlier Libya, Tunisia/ Atlantic routes, meaning more body counts (deaths).

The Concerns

 a) Narrative Control

From all this, Africa is framed, not as a development partner but as a source of irregular migrants. The new Pact’s language centres on “illegal flows” from Africa, but at the same time, it acknowledges wanting to attract African talent. The EU talks about “partnership”, but the policy looks like coercion and keeping Africans out.

b) Responsibility Shift

By setting return hubs in Africa, the EU is cutting its asylum responsibility. With a migrant in African hubs, the EU’s legal, political burden drops, but Africa’s responsibility starts, including housing, security, health, due process and diplomatic fallout if rights are violated.

 c) Solidarity Redefined

In EU member states, it is “responsibility and solidarity”, but outside the EU, it becomes “externalised responsibility and conditional responsibility”. Solidarity, which used to mean helping the refugee, sharing refugee protection, now, in essence, according to the new Pact, means helping Europe deport.

Critique

Return Hubs

Under this new system, member states will be allowed to establish so-called *”return hubs”* in non-EU countries. A non-EU national found to be staying illegally within a member state will be obliged to leave the EU country “immediately or within a given time,” and a migrant or asylum seeker in such a situation could find themselves in “return hubs” whilst waiting for deportation. Such measures are a reflection of anti- growth sentiment fuelled by the rise of far-right-wing politics.

Thus, Africa becomes an EU deportation holding ground in the form of “return hubs” outside EU borders. If an African country agrees to cooperate, no problem, but the real danger is that Africa can be “pressured” to host EU detention or deportation centres. A good example is the United Kingdom(UK)- Rwanda example, and now Rwanda is filing a 100-million-pound arbitration case against the UK.

Should the suggested experiment in “return hubs” normalise, others, none other than the EU will copy? And what does that mean? Africa becomes a global waiting room for unwanted migrants. Does this develop or industrialise Africa? NO!! But what it does effectively is to externalise Europe’s problem, Europe’s border.

Mirroring the United States of America (US), “Third Country Deportees” policy, Africa risks being dumped with deportees with criminal records that the EU doesn’t want. It becomes a security risk for Africa. And at the end of the day, mother Africa becomes a dumping ground, a global waiting room for western security risks and unwanted migrants…without fixing the global system creating such displacements in the first place.

Safe Third Country Concept

This can result in African host countries becoming overburdened with displaced populations that Europe refuses to process. Expanded use of the “safe third country” concept will mean that more people will be expected to be returned to a country of transit, like Tunisia, for instance, reflecting the growing externalisation trend that seeks to shift asylum responsibility to non-EU countries and boost returns. This responsibility Africa is being burdened with places logistical and financial strains on African governments.

Externalisation of Border Controls

The Pact forces African nationals to act as Europe’s border guards, which can lead to human rights abuses, detentions, and the militarisation of local regions. And it is Africa that will bear the diplomatic fallout from such human rights violations. An African state can become the _”fall guy_ ” in the event of violations happening in African hubs. But United Nations (UN) High Commissioner Volker Turk said that he “deeply regretted” the rules ( EU new migration rules), warning that states cannot simply outsource their human rights obligations, because there is a high risk of “serious human rights violations” for vulnerable people, including children.

Neglecting legal pathways

pact for focusing excessively on deterrence and returns rather than creating safe, legal, and organised routes for African labour migrants and students. Africa will pay in the form of body counts(death) as migrants are forced to use more deadly and dangerous routes.

Trade/Aid/Visas Weaponised

Weaponising of development aid, trade deals and visa restrictions against African priories is a possible, potential danger, especially for African states that may turn out to be uncooperative against the EU migrant and asylum Pact. The EU’s “Assertive Migration Diplomacy” does not augur well for Africa. Aid received by Africa can be tied to the conditionality of stopping migrants or accepting deportees. So there is room for Aid, trade deals to shift from “solidarity to self-interests”(for the EU).

Conclusion

Europe is adopting the Pact to solve EU electoral problems accentuated by the rise of far-right politics, which is gaining ground in most of the EU, but at the expense of Africa.

The new migration and asylum Pact gives EU member states collective leverage against Africa in this migration issue. On the one hand, the EU can pay instead of taking people. The EU can detain longer and deport faster.

The EU can force third countries via visas/ aid, and even trade deals. The EU can suspend rules in the event of what the EU defines as a crisis. On the other hand, Mother Africa loses out. Land and infrastructure are lost on the EU detention or deportation infrastructure and facilities in having “return hubs”.

Africa can be pressured into accepting deportees, whilst skilled youth continue to leave. Aid can be diverted to deal with migration problems. Aid, trade, and visas all can become weapons against African interests as long as they do not cooperate with the EU on migration and migrants’ issues.

In all this, Africa is going to be burdened with a new burden. Africa will manage the EU’s unwanted migrants, but it is the EU which sets the rules, not Africa. Does this promote Africa’s development, sovereignty or resource control? NO!!…it simply internalises the migration problem costs to Africa.

F. Madondo (African Teacher) fortmada123@gmail.com