Latest news with #illegalMigration
Telegraph
3 days ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Starmer has blown another negotiation
It is difficult to think of a better summary of the travails of Sir Keir Starmer's government than the farcical circumstances of his press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron. While Sir Keir and Mr Macron were announcing a pilot scheme that would see some migrants arriving on Britain's shores sent back to France – with an equivalent number in turn coming the other way – up to 600 migrants made the journey across the Channel. With the number of migrants returned to France on a weekly basis speculated to be as few as 50, it could take three months to undo yesterday's crossings alone. For his part, meanwhile, Mr Macron used his time in front of the press to pin the blame on Brexit, rather than the curious inability of the French authorities to crack down on people smuggling within their territory. It was a poor attempt at deflecting blame, particularly when the declaration issued by the British and French governments noted that the implementation of any deal would be subject to 'prior legal scrutiny' from the bloc, illustrating once again the way in which Brussels has tied its members hands in the fight against illegal migration. But if the French President's accusation was astray there was, at least, a grain of truth in the insinuation that the Channel crisis is at least in part of Britain's making. As it stands, the deal struck with Macron will be woefully inadequate to the task of combating the trade across the Channel. The idea is to dissuade illegal crossings by threatening those who arrive with deportation. But between the efforts of the open borders legal lobby and their friends in the judiciary, it is hard not to suspect that attempts to actually remove people from our shores will rapidly be bogged down in the courts, weakening the disincentive. Sir Keir, having made much of the Conservative Party's struggle to implement its Rwanda plan, may well find that his alternative, too, founders on the judiciary. Moreover, with the numbers arriving quite possibly exceeding departures, the idea that the scheme will function as a disincentive may also prove woefully misguided. Deals such as that struck between the EU and Turkey which proved successful did so because they removed vast numbers of arrivals rather than a tiny fraction. Without this guarantee, the crossings will continue, deal or no deal.
Al Jazeera
3 days ago
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
What's in the one-in-one-out migrant deal between the UK and France?
The United Kingdom and France are close to a new agreement aimed at preventing tens of thousands of migrants from crossing the English Channel from France in small boats, UK media reported on Thursday. French President Emmanuel Macron arrived in London on Tuesday for a three-day visit, marking the first state visit by a European leader since Britain's exit from the European Union. Here is all we know about the 'one-in-one-out' migrant deal being discussed during a bilateral summit between Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer in London. What's in the deal Macron and Starmer are discussing? The deal is aimed at deterring migrants from making dangerous trips across the English Channel from France to the UK in small boats. This year so far, more than 20,000 people have undertaken this journey. At the start of the summit with Macron on Thursday, Starmer said the two must 'apply our collective strength and leadership' to the challenges of undocumented migration. 'We all agree that the situation in the Channel cannot go on as it is so we're bringing new tactics into play and a new intent to tackle illegal migration and break the business model of the criminal gangs.' Many migrants without visas or permits departing France by sea attempt to cross to the UK in small, inflatable boats. They frequently pay large sums of money to gangs who arrange the boats in northern France. Journeys can be incredibly dangerous and people have died making the crossing. Under a new agreement, France would agree to take back asylum seekers who have crossed over to the UK and who cannot prove a family connection to the UK. For each migrant France takes back, the UK would grant asylum to one migrant from France who can prove a family connection to the UK. During the initial stages of the agreement, details of which were reported by French newspaper Le Monde, the UK would initially send about 50 migrants to France per week. Le Monde also reported that the UK would only be able to return 2,600 migrants in a single year. The UK press quoted a government source on Thursday that plans would be scaled up if the initial scheme is successful. Who is to blame for the influx of people by boat to the UK? Both France and the UK have laid the blame on each other. One of France's main criticisms of the UK is that it attracts migrants without visas because UK laws are too lenient or not adequately enforced. In his speech to Parliament during his state visit on Tuesday, Macron said that one-third of all migrants arriving in France intend to move on to the UK. During negotiations with the UK 18 months ago when he was interior minister, Gerald Darmanin, France's current justice minister, said: 'Britain must do something to make itself less attractive and change the rules of their labour market because you can work without papers in the UK,' he said. The UK disputes this, saying people are drawn to it because of family or diaspora ties, as well as many being able to speak English. Instead, some politicians in the UK have blamed France for not policing its northern shores enough. However, Starmer is also expected to unveil new plans to crack down harder on illegal work in the UK. France, in turn, says it is making huge efforts to deter migrant departures from northern beaches and to take action against people-smuggling gangs. Why is this agreement being discussed now? The deal is being discussed because of the rising number of unauthorised migrants arriving from France to the UK, Peter Walsh, a senior researcher at the Migration Observatory at Oxford University, told Al Jazeera. Just one year since Starmer's Labour party won a landslide election, the prime minister's popularity has tanked in the UK – in large part because of the failure to stop undocumented migration – while support for the far-right, anti-migration Reform UK party has soared. In particular, Reform's manifesto pledges to clamp down on migrants coming to the UK in small boats. It states: 'Illegal migrants who come to the UK will be detained and deported. And if needed, migrants in small boats will be picked up and taken back to France.' The Conservative Party, which was in power before Starmer won last year's general election, pledged to impose a binding cap for legal migration and to deport asylum seekers who arrive by irregular means to Rwanda for processing and potential resettlement. Labour scrapped this plan as soon as it came to power. As of July 7, immigration and asylum stand as the most significant issue in the UK, at 51 percent, according to polling by YouGov. According to commentary in UK media, Starmer's meeting with Macron also holds symbolic significance, as it allows the British PM to show that he has been able to maintain a good relationship with his main European partners since he negotiated a 'reset' trade deal with the EU in May. How many people cross the English Channel in small boats each year? This year, 21,117 people crossed the English Channel from France to the UK in small boats as of July 6, according to UK government data. This was a 56 percent increase in the number of people crossing in small boats during the same period in 2024. In the whole of 2024, nearly 37,000 people crossed the English Channel in small boats, bringing the weekly average to about 700 arrivals. In the past year, 73 people have died trying to cross the English Channel, the highest number recorded in one year so far, according to data by the International Organization for Migration (IOM), an intergovernmental organisation within the United Nations. Small boat arrivals made up one-third of all asylum applications in 2024, according to an analysis by the Migration Observatory based on statistics from the UK Home Office. Why do so many people make this risky crossing? Walsh told Al Jazeera that people take the risk to cross the Channel for a wide range of reasons. 'One is the presence of family members, friends, and members of their community already in the UK,' he said. He explained that because the UK is no longer part of the EU following Brexit, it does not have access to the bloc's asylum fingerprint database any more. Therefore, British authorities cannot know if people who arrive in small boats have already claimed asylum in an EU country. 'If it did, the UK would be able to dismiss the claims,' he said. 'The UK is also no longer a part of the Dublin system that would allow for such asylum claimants to be returned to the EU. Migrants understand this, so view reaching the UK as giving them another chance at securing residence in the UK.' The Dublin regulation – the framework for the EU's rules on asylum seekers – establishes the criteria that determine which EU member state is responsible for examining asylum applications submitted by someone who is originally from a third country. Between 2018 and 2024, 68 percent of asylum applications from migrants who arrived in small boats were granted in the UK. This was higher than the grant rate for asylum applications generally, which was 57 percent for the same duration. This may be another reason people are attracted to the UK, experts say. What steps have France and the UK taken to stop boats crossing the English Channel? In March 2023, the UK, under former Conservative PM Rishi Sunak, signed a three-year deal with France, under which the UK agreed to pay France 480 million pounds ($650m) to tighten its border patrols and surveillance. Under this deal, France agreed to deploy 500 officers and provide a new detention centre in France, which would be operational by the end of 2026. France also agreed to increase funding for stricter enforcement, without specifying the amount of money. Separately, in June this year, France agreed to come up with a plan to intercept small boats heading to the UK, for the first time, expanding its navy with six patrol boats that will rescue migrants but also intercept them from heading to the UK. Paris has agreed to do this for boats which are within 300 metres (1,000ft) from the French shore, and has asked the UK for extra funding to fund the police and equipment to enforce these interceptions, according to UK media. French police have recently taken to damaging the small boats, slashing their rubber frames with knives. The French Interior Ministry told The Associated Press that the police had not been ordered to do this, however. What are the criticisms of the new deal under discussion? Since an average of 700 migrants enter the UK by small boat each week, if the UK government sends an average of 50 people back to France per week, that would amount to just one in 14 being returned. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp of the opposition Conservative Party told The Times newspaper: 'This deal will mean that 94 percent of illegal migrants crossing the Channel will get to stay. That is pathetic and will not deter anyone. By contrast, the Rwanda deterrent would have seen 100 percent of illegal migrants removed and that would have worked to deter people crossing the Channel. Keir Starmer's failure continues.' The plan could potentially face a legal challenge under the UN Refugee Convention, which mandates asylum seekers' rights to request protection. French officials are also critical of the deal, cautious it could result in France becoming a 'return hub' for migrants that the UK refuses to accept. 'We are putting ourselves into the hands of the British without minimal reciprocal elements,' an unnamed French official involved in the talks told Le Monde. The policy could also provide ammunition against Macron for his right-wing political critics, who may question why he has agreed to take back migrants wanting to live in Britain. The UK is not subject to the EU's Dublin regulations, while France is. This makes the status of migrants returning from Britain to France unclear, causing concern among other European nations, who are upset with France for bilaterally negotiating the deal without consulting the EU. 'Why should other Europeans be obliged to take these returns under EU, Dublin rules when they result from French obligation under a bilateral deal with the UK, a non-EU member, that France negotiated without asking us?' The Times quoted an unnamed EU diplomat as saying on Thursday. A deal is also opposed by the southern European countries of Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Malta and Spain, who have been receiving unauthorised migrants at an increasing rate, the Financial Times reported. These countries are concerned that if migrants are sent back to France from the UK, they may try to enter southern Europe from France instead. As the 2000s came to a close, the immigrant population multiplied by more than fivefold in Spain, Italy and Greece, according to a 2016 research article written by scholars from the University of Liege in Belgium. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said on Wednesday during Prime Minister's Questions in Parliament that the UK must refuse to accept 'undocumented males' coming in small boats as part of a deal with France. Farage said Starmer should not bow to an 'increasingly arrogant, anti-Brexit French president'. Starmer responded, saying Farage's approach is to 'break everything and claim that's how you fix things'. Weighing the viability of an agreement between Paris and London, Walsh said: 'A returns deal may have an impact if it affects enough people. We don't know how many people could plausibly be returned to France under this deal, but there's a risk that if an insufficiently low share of individuals are returned, then people wishing to reach the UK by small boat may see the risk of return as another risk worth taking – alongside the much greater risk of getting in a small boat.'
Arab News
06-07-2025
- Politics
- Arab News
Dual citizenship concerns simmer below the surface
Nearly 7 million Americans have sworn allegiance to another country besides the US, data shows. Some might brush off the issue of dual citizenship because it only impacts about 3 percent of America's population. But compare that with the No. 1 concern of many Americans today: the 11.7 million foreigners who have entered the country and are living there illegally. Why is the issue of illegal migration so much more of a concern for American political leaders than the issue of swearing an oath of loyalty to a foreign country? Both were in the news last week, but they were addressed very differently by both politicians and by the mainstream news media. Congress on Thursday passed President Donald Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' which sets aside more than $170 billion for immigration and border enforcement. However, the new law does not address the issue of dual citizenship. But this took center stage at the White House the same day, when the president greeted Edan Alexander, a dual American-Israeli citizen and soldier in the Israeli military who was held hostage by Hamas after being captured during the Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attack. Born and raised in New Jersey, the 21-year-old moved to Israel in 2022, where he swore an oath of allegiance to Israel to gain citizenship. He then enlisted in the army and was serving as a staff sergeant when he was captured. He was freed by Hamas in May in an apparent goodwill gesture as part of negotiations to secure a ceasefire. During the White House meeting, no mention was made of the fact that he had never served in the US military to defend America. Pro-Israel propaganda has extensively used Alexander's US citizenship to fuel anti-Arab sentiments. It asserts that Hamas and Palestinians generally are not just anti-Israel, they are also anti-American. But the real question is, can someone who pledges loyalty and patriotism to a foreign country truly be an American? As a Palestinian American who served during the Vietnam War, whose brother served in the US Marines and whose father and uncle served during the Second World War fighting the Nazis, why is our loyalty questioned but not Alexander's — a person who has never served America but has served a foreign country? Ironically, the loyalty of Americans of Arab heritage like myself — and especially those who are Muslim — is often questioned, challenged and even used as a basis to confront our expressions of concern for Israel's war crimes and genocide in the Gaza Strip over the past two years. The real question is, can someone who pledges loyalty and patriotism to a foreign country truly be an American? Ray Hanania Arab and Muslim students protesting Israel's Gaza war on college campuses have been viciously attacked and accused of antisemitism. The US Justice Department has launched efforts to expel them. Most American politicians prefer to avoid the issue of dual citizenship, but they pounce on false accusations of anti-Americanism by pro-Palestine students. While pro-Israel propaganda has suppressed public debate over the treachery of a person swearing dual national loyalties, the issue continues to force its way into public debates. In March, Republican Rep. Thomas Massie introduced legislation — the Dual Loyalty Disclosure Act — that, if it were to become law, would require Americans who run for federal office to declare if they have citizenship of a foreign country. 'Dual citizens elected to the United States Congress should renounce citizenship in all other countries,' said Rep. Massie. 'At a minimum, they should disclose their citizenship in other countries and abstain from votes specifically benefiting those countries. If we are going to continue to allow members of Congress to acquire and retain citizenship in other countries, they should at least be required to disclose to voters all countries of which they consider themselves to be citizens." The bill is co-sponsored by, among others, Reps. Andy Biggs, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Clay Higgins, all supporters of Trump who have been vocal about opposing excessive foreign aid to all countries, including Israel, and redirecting those funds to 'American needs.' Dual citizenship is an issue of patriotism for every nation. Why should people who enjoy citizenship and benefits in one country be able to pledge their loyalty to another country and serve in its military? It is an expression of that person's lack of faith in the country in which they live. It is like having a plan B: just in case things do not go well in one country, they can use their dual citizenship to flee to another country and to be loyal to it instead. Dual citizenship is a political contradiction that challenges the foundation of national loyalty. It should be banned, not just in America but in every country around the world.
Times
02-07-2025
- Politics
- Times
Home Office warns end of Afghan scheme risks more small boats
A government decision to close without warning two schemes for Afghans to apply for sanctuary could increase the number of illegal migrants heading to Britain on small boats, according to a Home Office policy paper. The potential decision by desperate Afghans forced to flee the Taliban by illegal means would result in 'wider costs' to taxpayers, the explanatory memorandum to a statement of changes to the immigration rules outlines. There was a deliberate choice to end the schemes with 'no notice' to 'prevent a spike in last-minute applications and mitigate against an increase to the backlog of outstanding applications', officials admitted. Ministers were accused by campaigners on Tuesday of 'perverse' treatment of Afghans after the government abruptly ended the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) for those who had helped Britain to fight the Taliban. The Afghan Citizens Resettlement Scheme (ACRS), designed to help vulnerable people and those who assisted British efforts in Afghanistan to legally come to safety in Britain, was also closed. Campaigners said the applicants had no warning that the schemes would cease to exist at 3pm on Tuesday. The deadline for applications was buried in a 138-page Home Office statement of changes to the immigration rules published on the same day. Now it has emerged in an explanatory note that there is a risk that the closure of Arap will merely displace applications from the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to the Home Office, either in the form of asylum claims, considerations for leave outside the rules or other applications on family and human rights grounds. 'Similarly, there is a risk that eligible individuals will remain at risk or will seek to use irregular routes, including small boats, following the closure of Arap,' the paper says. 'The latter would result in wider costs to government. However, it is not currently possible to estimate these potential impacts.' • Migrant Channel crossings hit a record 20,000 in six months It adds that the MoD had received 13,000 principal applications since October and that applications were still being received. 'The impact of the closure of the scheme with no notice period will prevent a spike in last-minute applications and mitigate against an increase to the backlog of outstanding applications that need to be considered for eligibility by the MoD,' the paper says.
Daily Mail
02-07-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
How Poland stopped 98 per cent of illegal migrant crossings with 'big and beautiful' 116-mile, 16ft-high razor-wire border fence fitted with motion sensors and monitored by armed guards
Poland 's Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski has claimed a £300 million border wall has proven '98 per cent effective' at preventing attempts of illegal migration from Belarus. 'We had large numbers of people who were invited by Russia and Belarus from the Middle East and Africa who were then pushed across the Polish-Belarusian border into Poland,' Sikorski told BBCR4's Today programme. Warsaw alleges that Minsk and Moscow have long been waging a 'hybrid war', seeking to flood Poland with refugees to strain the country's finances and law enforcement resources, and destabilise civil society. 'This year we have completed a big and beautiful fence with sensors overground, underground, with a patrol road alongside it, so hardly anybody gets through that barrier,' Sikorski declared. He also mentioned a recent amendment to immigration legislation that stipulates migrants attempting to reach Poland via Russia and Belarus can continue to apply for asylum in Poland, but only at consulate buildings in Moscow and Minsk. The anti-migration fencing was completed in June 2022 and now spans a 116-mile-long stretch of the Polish-Belarusian border, but was subsequently upgraded with surveillance equipment, including CCTV cameras, heat and motion sensors. The five-metre-high metal fence scythes through the Polish countryside, covered with miles upon miles of barbs and topped with razor wire. Border checkpoints are also reinforced with huge concrete slabs, each weighing more than 1.5 tonnes, along with secondary walls and barbed-wire fencing. Sikorski spoke to BBCR4 amid discussions about soaring illegal migration figures in Britain, with 20,000 migrants said to have arrived in Britain via small boats crossing The Channel so far in 2025. Now, Polish authorities are proceeding full steam ahead with a new project - East Shield - which aims to transform its entire frontier with Belarus and the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad into one gigantic, closely surveilled fortification. The 400-mile-long construction, announced last year and targeted for completion in 2028, arguably constitutes the single most significant national security investment in Poland's post-war history at more than £2 billion. It was green-lit by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk's government in response to Russia's war in Ukraine, and Moscow and Minsk's so-called hybrid war tactics. In addition to the barbed wire-topped fencing, concrete reinforcements and secondary defences, the East Shield will see strips of land turned into minefields and littered with anti-tank fortifications including steel and concrete hedgehogs, 'dragon's teeth' obstacles and deep trenches, along with drone defence equipment. This multi-layered line of defence is expected to extend more than 200 metres back from the initial border wall. Behind these defences, Warsaw is constructing bunkers, firing posts and other military infrastructure in the forests, woods and small villages spanning the length of the country to provide yet more resistance should the deterrent fail. According to details provided by the government, the programme will also employ state-of-the-art surveillance equipment, including imagery intelligence (IMINT), signals intelligence (SIGINT), and acoustic monitoring to improve situational awareness of the would-be battlefield. Cezary Tomczyk, Poland's Secretary of State in the Ministry of National Defence, sees the mammoth project as not just a defence insurance policy for Poland, but for the whole of Europe. Speaking at the launch of the project in 2024, he said: 'Today we are making a decision that will change how we think about Poland's security for decades. This is not just Poland's border. It is the border of the European Union and NATO. The frontline of democracy, order and stability.' As such, Poland worked to attract investment from the European Union's lending and financing arm, the European Investment Bank (EIB), to help finance East Shied. In March, the defence ministry announced that the EIB had agreed in principle to spend up to €1 billion on the project, close to half the forecasted cost. Lieutenant General Stanislaw Czosnek, Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the Polish Armed Forces, told Ukrainskaya Pravda in May that the invasion of Ukraine by Russia was the primary motivating factor behind East Shield. 'The security environment in our region has significantly deteriorated. We are in a state of hybrid war, and we are acting in advance,' he said. In the months before Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Poland was already struggling to cope with a constant stream of migrants crossing the border from Belarus. Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko had urged migrants to forge a path further West and even began facilitating visas and travel from Middle Eastern countries to accelerate the process. The move prompted Warsaw to break with EU migration policies and begin work on its border fence - a project whose necessity was justified in November 2021 when crowds of migrants attempted to bust through then-incomplete defences. Heavily armed riot police and border security teams were dispatched to manage the ruckus. In one particularly shocking clash, some members of a group of more than 1,000 migrants tried to hack down a barbed-wire fence only to meet a phalanx of Polish guards who forced them back with pepper spray. Hundreds of migrants broke through the Belarusian border fence close to the Kuznica crossing with Poland, before rushing towards Polish barbed wire barricades, in November 2021 Polish forces are seen standing guard at the border to block the passage of migrants from Belarus in 2021 Poland's then-Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said: 'The Polish government is determined and we will defend the security of our country,' labelling the action an 'invasion' orchestrated by Belarus. The border wall was completed after months of work in June 2022, but the number of people lodging asylum claims in Poland only continued to increase. Hundreds of migrants have also attempted to penetrate the border fencing, mostly to no avail. Those that do manage to sneak or force their way through are swiftly detained by heavily armed Polish border guards patrolling the fence in armoured vehicles. A brazen attempt to cut through the fence in March proved the last straw for Premier Donald Tusk, who promptly suspended the right to claim asylum in Poland for 60 days, save for unaccompanied minors, pregnant women, elderly or unwell people. Earlier this year, the Polish government confirmed it would not take part in the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum, which the bloc implemented to manage the arrival of asylum seekers. Under the agreement, states could either relocate a certain number of migrants, pay a financial contribution or provide operation support to help resettlement. Tusk said: 'Poland will not implement the Migration Pact in a way that would introduce additional quotas of immigrants in Poland. 'We are ready to cooperate with everyone to protect Europe from illegal migration. However, Poland will not take on any additional burdens. We have already taken on more than anyone could have imagined just a few years ago.' As Poland continues cracking down on illegal migration, Britain is struggling with record-breaking numbers of migrants arriving via small boats. More than 20,000 people have reached Britain by crossing The Channel on migrant vessels since the start of the year. The same milestone was not hit until mid-to-late August in previous years, including 2022 - the year which went on to see a record annual total of 45,700 arrivals. Since the start of the so-called Channel crisis in 2018, more than 170,000 migrants have reached Britain by small boat - but only about four per cent have been removed. The overall cost of the asylum system was £5.3billion in 2023-24, more than double the amount spent in 2021-22. Accommodation costs are expected to hit more than £15billion over 10 years - triple the original estimate - the National Audit Office said in May. French President Emmanuel Macron's government recently agreed to change its rules so gendarmes and other officials can intercept dinghies already in the Channel, and prevent them heading for Britain. The new 'maritime doctrine', expected to come into force in the next few weeks, will allow French police to block small boat departures within 300 metres of the shoreline. However, French police unions are understood to have expressed concerns that their members may be required to enter the water wearing body armour, which can weigh up to 6lbs and would put them at risk of drowning. Last month, sources said French officers had also raised concerns about being unable to carry firearms if they are required to go into the sea, because salt water would damage the weapons. French police colonel Olivier Alary told the BBC earlier this month his teams 'will be able to do more' once the 300 metre rule comes into force.
