In a major policy pivot, the European Union has proposed a unified list of “safe countries of origin,” meaning that citizens from those nations will face greater difficulty obtaining asylum within EU territory. Although the move is cautious and calculated, the EU has at least finally acknowledged that the bloc’s asylum system has become a sieve.
The list includes Morocco, Tunisia, India, Egypt, Colombia, Bangladesh, and Kosovo—countries from which increasing numbers of people are applying for asylum in Europe, often without meeting the actual requirements for international protection. With this designation, the Commission aims to speed up the processing of clearly unfounded claims and facilitate the return of illegal migrants.
This decision marks a small victory for advocates of stricter border controls and a more realistic migration policy. After years of pressure, protests, and electoral success by patriotic parties in several countries—especially in Italy and, to a lesser extent, in France—Brussels appears to be conceding that the current model is not working.
In the words of the EU Commissioner for Migration, Magnus Brunner, “Many Member States are facing a significant backlog of asylum applications, so any measure that helps accelerate procedures is essential.” And that administrative collapse is no accident: for years, the EU has promoted an open-door policy that has overwhelmed national reception systems and generated growing public anger.
It is no coincidence that this measure comes at the same time the Commission has also proposed speeding up the implementation of key parts of the new Migration and Asylum Pact, initially scheduled to take effect in June 2026. With this proposal, the door opens to accelerated border procedures, especially for asylum seekers from countries where less than 20% of applicants are approved—cases where, according to the data, most applications are not genuinely justified.
As expected, so-called human rights organizations have reacted strongly. They argue that labeling countries such as India or Tunisia as “safe” is a violation of the right to asylum, claiming that many applicants are fleeing political persecution, domestic violence, or discrimination.
However, this backlash is also predictable. For years, many of these organizations have ignored the social, economic, and cultural consequences of unchecked migration and the mounting frustration of millions of Europeans.
Despite the apparent policy shift, caution is still warranted. The proposal must be approved by both the European Parliament and the Member States. Moreover, the Commission has left the door open for the list to be “dynamic,” meaning it could be expanded, revised, or even suspended for certain countries.
It is also not the first time Brussels has floated such an idea. In 2015, a similar list was proposed, but the effort collapsed due to internal divisions, particularly over Turkey’s inclusion. And let us not forget: each Member State may continue to maintain its national list, potentially broader than the standard EU list, if it so chooses.