The European Union has reached a deal on tougher migration rules that would allow countries to set up so-called “return hubs” outside the bloc, a move hailed by supporters as a practical answer to stalled deportations, but denounced by rights groups as a dangerous step towards offshore detention. Meanwhile, the question of EU enlargement is also on the cards at a Western Balkans summit.
The agreement, struck on Monday between European lawmakers and member states, comes as Brussels is also looking eastwards with renewed urgency.
At a Western Balkans summit in Montenegro later this week, EU leaders will seek to show Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, North Macedonia, Kosovo, Serbia and Montenegro that enlargement is back on the table – not as a vague aspiration, but as a strategic priority.
The timing also underlines the EU’s delicate balancing act. As the European Union tries to convince its neighbours that membership is a real prospect, it is also preparing rules that could see some non-EU countries host centres for people who have been ordered to leave the bloc.
“Today’s agreement shows that we are bringing our European house in order,” said Magnus Brunner, the EU commissioner for migration. “With the new rules, we have more control over who can come to the EU, who can stay and who needs to leave.”
To display this content from X (Twitter), you must enable advertisement tracking and audience measurement.
A tougher line on returns
The reform is aimed at improving the EU’s patchy record on deportations. According to the European Commission, less than 30 percent of people ordered to leave the bloc are actually returned to their country of origin.
Under the new rules, migrants subject to expulsion would face a stricter obligation to leave and to cooperate with authorities. Those who refuse could face tougher penalties, including detention.
The most politically charged element is the possibility of creating return hubs beyond EU borders. These centres could be used either as final destinations or as transfer points for people whose asylum claims have been rejected.
Supporters argue that the hubs could make returns more efficient and deter irregular migration. Austria and Germany are already exploring options. The far-right European Conservatives and Reformists group welcomed the deal, declaring: “The era of returns has begun.”
But doubts remain within the bloc itself. France and Spain have questioned whether such centres would work in practice, and the deal still needs formal approval from the European Parliament and member states before entering into force.
Most measures would apply immediately after the law takes effect, while some provisions would be phased in after 12 months to allow governments to adapt national rules.
Rights groups sound alarm
For human rights organisations, the agreement marks a worrying escalation in Europe’s migration policy.
“This deal will give governments much broader powers to detain and deport people,” said Marta Welander of the International Rescue Committee. She warned that the rules could normalise immigration raids, expand detention in “prison-like facilities” outside EU territory and increase the risk of people being sent to countries where they could face persecution, torture or worse.
Critics also point to the chequered record of earlier attempts at offshore processing. Britain abandoned its plan to send undocumented migrants to Rwanda, while Italy’s migrant centres in Albania have faced legal challenges and struggled to get off the ground.
Rome’s deal with Tirana, approved by Albania’s Constitutional Court in 2024, allowed Italy to run two centres near the Albanian port of Shengjin. One was intended to register asylum seekers rescued in Italian waters, while another would house people waiting for decisions on their claims.
The facilities, managed by Italy but located on Albanian soil, were designed to hold up to 3,000 people at any one time. The five-year accord was estimated to cost more than €650 million.
The plan caused uproar on both sides of the Adriatic. Opposition MPs in Italy accused Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni of using migration as “electoral propaganda”, while Albania’s opposition denounced Prime Minister Edi Rama for what it called a lack of transparency and a risk to national security.
Rights groups were even more scathing. The International Rescue Committee called the agreement “dehumanising”, while Amnesty International described it as “illegal and unenforceable”.
For Brussels, the lesson is awkward but useful: return hubs may sound tidy on paper, but they can quickly become legal, diplomatic and moral minefields.
Enlargement back in focus
The migration deal has landed just as European Council President António Costa is touring the Western Balkans ahead of Friday’s summit in Tivat, Montenegro.
Speaking in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Costa said the gathering was intended to show that EU enlargement is a real opportunity. In a world marked by geopolitical uncertainty and economic instability, he said, expansion is a “geostrategic interest for Europe” and an investment in the continent’s “peace, stability and security”.
His message was clear: the EU wants to keep the Western Balkans close, particularly as Russia and China seek influence in the region. Montenegro and Albania are seen as leading candidates, while Bosnia-Herzegovina has lagged behind amid deep ethnic divisions and pro-Russian separatist pressures from Bosnian Serb leaders.
Costa urged Bosnian officials to accelerate reforms, saying now was the time to focus on the goal of EU membership.
The bigger picture, then, is of a bloc trying to be both firmer and more open: tougher on irregular migration, but more serious about future enlargement. That balance will not be easy.
Candidate countries are expected to align with EU laws and values across 35 policy areas, from justice standards to agriculture and fisheries. At the same time, some may find themselves under pressure to cooperate with migration schemes that remain deeply contested.
For EU leaders, the coming days offer a chance to project confidence: a union capable of managing its borders while expanding its reach. For critics, the risk is that Europe’s renewed appetite for control could come at too high a human cost.
(With newswires)
.png?w=600)
