• Home /
• Outsourcing Borders: Monitoring EU externalisation policy /
• Bulletin 11 /
• Migration partnerships

Migration partnerships

Danish presidency hails €12.5 bn EU-Turkey partnership as ‘successful’ /// Council touts its human rights approach while ignoring human rights abuses /// EU cooperation deal with Uzbekistan includes migration plans

Danish presidency hails €12.5 billion EU-Turkey partnership as ‘successful’, looks to reconfigure

A letter (pdf) from the Presidency to the Working Party on the External Aspects of Asylum and Migration (EMWP) outlines the history and structure of migration cooperation with Turkey, and looks to the future. According to the report, despite troubling developments in the country, Turkey remains a ‘key partner’ on migration.

Overall, the tone is positive, with the report describing Turkey-EU migration cooperation (which has cost the EU €12.5bn since 2011) as a “success”, despite concerns raised by human rights and humanitarian organisations. This success appears to be judged by the amount of people detained in Turkey or otherwise prevented from reaching Europe.

Looking to the future of the cooperation, the Presidency notes in particular a desire to finally re-start deportations to Turkey.

The document reports a meeting between EU Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration, Magnus Brunner, and the Turkish interior minister, Ali Yerlikaya, in Istanbul on 2 July. The meeting is described as “constructive”, with a mutual interest noted in returns to Syria (Between 8 December 2024 and 14 August 2025, according to the report, 411 649 Syrians had voluntarily returned to Syria).

Turkey has enhanced its cooperation with both Frontex and Europol in recent years, and discussions are underway for a new working arrangement with Frontex. There also appears to be appetite to update the working arrangement with Europol, in order to facilitate the sharing of personal data. The current inability to do so is described as a “limiting factor”.

Concluding, the report invites EMWP delegations to give their own opinions on migration cooperation with Turkey, and invites them to update the group on member states’ bilateral programmes.

Delegates are also invited to comment on their main priorities for Turkey cooperation, in light of the changes in Syria, and give their thoughts on whether the “one-for-one” model of the EU-Turkey statement is a good model to pursue with other countries outside of Europe. The “one-for-one” model has been duplicated by the UK and France in their agreement on migration across the Channel.

Council touts its human rights approach while ignoring human rights abuses

The Presidency has updated the EMWP on its efforts to implement so-called ‘Human Rights-Based Approaches (HRBA)’[1] in migration partnerships:

“Upholding human rights play [sic] a key role in ensuring the legitimacy of the EU’s partnerships with third countries, and thus the EU and Member States are under constant scrutiny when it comes to upholding human rights in its migration cooperation.”

The document (pdf) notes various issues raised about the human rights impacts of the EU’s externalisation projects, including by the European Court of Auditors in a September 2024 report.

These include a lack of human rights impact assessments, poor monitoring and compliance, insufficient reporting mechanisms and a lack of practical guidance for dealing with reports of human rights violations. Many of these criticisms were directed at projects under the EU Trust Fund for Africa.

The Council appears surprised to learn of the EU’s human rights shortcomings:

“…the Council noted with concern the findings of the ECA that, despite an innovative approach to identifying human rights risks in a difficult environment, the assessment of potential risks to human rights was not comprehensive, and that no formal procedure was in place to follow up systematically on allegations of human rights violations in the context of EUTF projects.”

The document goes on to describe various HRBA-informed strategies in response. These include improved monitoring and reporting, as well as follow-up and internal procedures on allegations of human rights violations.

The Council also claims a new procedure to “swiftly” suspend or terminate funding if allegations of abuse are substantiated, “to ensure that EU-funded projects are not perpetuating harm to the rights of migrants.”

There is also reference to the creation of a detailed guidance document, “The Human Rights-Based Approach in Migration and Forced Displacement”. This is not currently publicly available. The document also refers to “contractual templates” for project grants in partner countries, with stronger human rights safeguards on paper.

The document’s tone reflects the way the EU uses a fog of human rights language to obscure the harms caused by externalisation. Amid discussion of the many “human-rights-based” strategies to prevent abuses in places such as Tunisia and Libya, there is a studied ignorance of what those abuses actually entail.

For example, the report quotes a 2023 UN report that found EU support had been used “in the context of the interception and detention of migrants”. For some reason the Danish Presidency chose not to reference the following paragraphs in the UN report, which describe systematic torture at the hands of the EU’s migration partners.

It is also notable that, while the Council touts new procedures to suspend funding in cases of human rights abuses, the report does not give any suggestion such a procedure is being considered in the case of Libya. Rather, the Council strategy focusses on increasing “voluntary” returns from Libya.

Guiding questions for the EMWP at the end of the document suggest the Human Rights-Based Approach in migration partnerships may continue to be a topic of discussion in future meetings.

EU cooperation deal with Uzbekistan includes migration plans

In late October 2025 the EU signed an Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement with Uzbekistan. Articles 14 and 15 of the agreement set out plans for cooperation on immigration, asylum and border control, as well as the readmission of deported people. One of the general principles of the agreement is: "Respect for democratic principles and human rights and fundamental freedoms".

Human Rights Watch noted in its 2024 world report that Uzbek authorities "increasingly targeted independent activists with unfounded criminal charges and blocked independent monitors’ access to the country."

///

[1] ‘HRBA’ is an established methodology adapted by the Commission that purports to put human rights at the forefront of its actions, along various principles including: meaningful participation and inclusion; non-discrimination and equality; accountability and the rule of law; and transparency.