The Mediterranean countries are initiating a new front in the battle to control the migration flow. The five countries facing the most pressure from North Africa—Italy, Spain, Greece, Malta, and Cyprus (Med-5)—are jointly challenging the UK and France's plan to conclude a bilateral agreement on the return of migrants.
The initiative envisages the British border police intercepting people entering the UK outside official checkpoints and directing them to France. Paris could then send these people back to the first EU member state they entered.
There are three documents in the asylum system that regulate the procedure for the reception and accommodation of migrants. Adopted in 1990, the Dublin Regulation stands as the oldest. It determines responsibility for the asylum procedure according to the country in which the first application was made.
However, the overloaded reception centres on the southern border of the European Union are often unable to provide adequate protection, rendering the system untenable. The new proposal from the UK and France does not change this basis but complicates it further.
Under heavy migratory pressure
The members of Med-5 declare that this practice will undermine the fundamental principles of the common European asylum policy.
The rules of the Dublin Regulation stipulate that the country in which a migrant first submits an asylum application is obliged to process it. When this rule was adopted in 1990, the influx at that time was negligible compared to today's waves.
Med-5 countries simply do not have the capacity to process hundreds of thousands of applications
The Dublin framework has become unsuitable because the Med-5 countries, which are under heavy migratory pressure, simply do not have the capacity to process hundreds of thousands of applications.
Italy recorded 9,168 arrivals by sea in the first three months of 2025, slightly fewer than in the same period last year, but still a strain on the coastal areas around Sicily and Calabria. Greece recorded 63,059 arrivals in the same period, including those who travelled by air or land to the north of Cyprus and then crossed the Green Line.
Spain ended last year with 41,425 illegal migrants and reported 11,851 arrivals in the first quarter of this year, with the biggest waves centred on the Canary Islands, while the external border with Morocco remained under heavy pressure. Cyprus registered 4,797 arrivals via the northern part of the island this year.
Malta, although geographically small, ended 2024 with a rather modest 238 arrivals by sea, which is encouraging but does not alleviate the underlying problem of overcrowding among those who normally record the highest numbers.
“One in, one out”
In June, the interior ministers of the Med-5 held an emergency meeting in Rome. They adopted a letter to the European Commission, in which they emphasised that bilateral agreements can undermine a common European response.
Italy called for the introduction of binding quotas within the EU to guarantee a fair distribution of each new wave of migration. Greece has called for all new arrivals to first be registered under the supervision of Frontex (a European Union agency responsible for coordinating co-operation and assisting member states in protecting and controlling their external borders).
Spain pointed out that any redirection from France will require deeper and greater financial support for those who remain on the front line. Cyprus and Malta have proposed the establishment of a joint centre for the provision of humanitarian aid and the integration of migrants to deprive smugglers of a lucrative source of income.
The European Commission has confirmed that it has received a letter from the Med-5 countries and that, together with the United Kingdom and France, it will review all bilateral initiatives on returning migrants to ensure that they meet EU legal standards.
“One in, one out” model could serve as a precedent for other bilateral agreements
At the same time, on 20 May, the Commission presented a proposal to amend the safe third country concept as part of the revision of the Pact on Migration and Asylum. This amendment removes the requirement that there must be a prior "link" between the migrant and the country concerned and, subject to a special agreement, allows the rule on conflicting asylum applications to be applied in exceptional circumstances.
The five countries at the forefront of migrant flows have warned that the “one in, one out” model (the UK transfers migrants to France, and France sends the same number back to the first EU member state they set foot in) could serve as a precedent for other bilateral agreements.
In this case, each member could make its own arrangements instead of applying the Dublin system uniformly, which would make joint decisions in the Council of Ministers more difficult and weaken trust between members.
The Commission therefore points out that any temporary measure must be based on a clear legal framework that obliges all members to apply the rules equally. Without such a framework, the risk of fragmentation of asylum policy remains high, and pressure on frontline countries could increase, despite the overall economic and political support within the EU.
A balanced approach
Predictions say that the next few weeks will be crucial. If the European Commission does not establish a clear legal framework for each temporary measure, bilateral agreements could become common practice.
This would further increase pressure on the Med-5 countries and undermine the uniform application of the Dublin system. In such an environment, debates in national parliaments could easily turn into court cases, as the compliance of these agreements with European law would be disputed.
Frontex's joint monitoring and better coordination with African countries would raise the hurdles for smugglers
In an alternative scenario, Brussels could decide on temporary quotas, with each member state taking in at least five per cent more migrants each year.
Additional resources from the common fund for asylum and migration would help the Med-5 to improve their reception capacities. Frontex's joint monitoring and better coordination with African countries would raise the hurdles for smugglers and, at the same time, offer support to those seeking protection.
In the end, the political capital of the politicians who are now defending the European model of solidarity will be the decisive indicator of success or failure. If there is not enough courage to compromise, fragmentation could become the new norm.
If the European bloc does not maintain a unified stance, then the rules that have built trust within the Union for years will collapse. Now more than ever, the issue of migration requires a balanced approach between respect for the right to asylum and a fair distribution of responsibility. Only such a framework can ensure that future migration flows do not destroy what once united Europe.
