European Union

Press statement by President António Costa following the coordination meetings on Ukraine between European Union leaders, President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy and US President Donald Trump, underlining the shared commitment to a ceasefire in Ukraine, respect for Ukraine’s sovereignty, and transatlantic cooperation in pursuit of a just and lasting peace.

Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union on the alignment of certain third countries with Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/1555 of 25 July 2025 amending Decision (CFSP) 2021/1277 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Lebanon.

The European Union leaders welcome President Trump’s efforts to put an end to Russia’s war of aggression and to achieve a just and lasting peace and security for Ukraine. The European Union stands with the Ukrainian people, united for a diplomatic solution that protects Ukraine's and Europe's vital security interests.

Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union on the alignment of certain third countries with Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/1495 of 18 July 2025 amending Decision 2014/512/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine.

Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union on the alignment of certain third countries with Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/1478 of 18 July 2025 amending Decision 2014/145/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.

Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union on the alignment of certain third countries with Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/1471 of 18 July 2025 amending Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine.

Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union on the alignment of certain third countries with Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2025/1461 of 18 July 2025 implementing Decision 2012/642/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine.

The EU issued a statement, welcoming the initialling of the Armenia-Azerbaijan Peace Treaty.

European Council President António Costa and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen welcome today's meeting of President Aliyev of Azerbaijan and Prime Minister Pashinyan of Armenia, hosted by US President Trump, to initialise an Agreement on Peace and Establishment of Interstate Relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

The Council adopted an implementing decision authorising the disbursement of the fourth instalment under the Ukraine Plan of the Ukraine Facility.

The EU issued a statement on the International Day of the World’s Indigenous Peoples reaffirming its strong commitment to support Indigenous Peoples within and beyond its borders, and to respect, protect and fulfil their rights as set out in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).

Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union on the alignment of certain third countries with Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/1481 of 18 July 2025 amending Decision (CFSP) 2023/2135 concerning restrictive measures in view of activities undermining the stability and political transition of Sudan.

Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union on the alignment of certain third countries with Council Implementing Decision (CFSP) 2025/1705 of 29 July 2025 implementing Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya.

Statement by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union on the alignment of certain third countries with Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/1577 of 29 July 2025 updating the list of persons, groups and entities covered by Common Position 2001/931/CFSP on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism, and repealing Decision (CFSP) 2025/207.

On Thursday 14 August, the European Commission approved €264 million in Hungarian state aid for the construction of Sunwoda's electric vehicle battery factory in Nyíregyháza. In a statement, the EU body ruled that the move complies with regulations.

Tens of thousands of desperate human beings have crossed the English Channel to seek our help. They are unarmed and come in peace.

Many are fleeing from countries torn apart by war and instability, in some cases worsened by conflicts in which Britain and its allies played a part.

Under international law, they are not ‘illegal’.

Refugees often have no choice but to travel by irregular means. Britain has closed almost all safe routes, yet once here, most are eventually recognised as genuine asylum seekers.

They don’t expect much in return, and they don’t get much.

• If destitute, they may be housed in temporary hotels or unwanted council properties.
• Their cash allowance is just a few pounds a day – and even less if hotel accommodation is provided.
• Most are barred from working while waiting for their claims to be processed.

And yet, once recognised as refugees, many repay society many times over: working as doctors, nurses, care staff, cleaners.

Meanwhile, Britain’s contribution to the global refugee crisis remains tiny: less than 0.5% of the world’s refugees are here.

At the end of 2024, there were approximately 42.7 million refugees globally, within a record 123.2 million people displaced worldwide. [UNHCR figures]

So why the fury? Why the language of “illegals” and “invaders”?

A BRITISH HISTORY OF INVASION

Nearly 90% of the world’s countries were invaded by Britain at some point in history. Hundreds of thousands of Britons set sail to conquer, colonise, and plunder abroad.

Stuart Laycock’s book All the Countries We’ve Ever Invaded records that only 22 nations escaped British intrusion.

And Britain did not arrive in peace. It came with armies, with weapons, with the intent to seize land, wealth, and even people through the brutal slave trade.

It could be said that Britons were the most prolific illegal immigrants in history. The global imbalance of wealth today – rich nations and poor nations – still bears the marks of colonial plunder.

THE REAL ILLEGALS?

Our wealth was built in part on the theft of others’ lands and lives.

Many of the countries most affected by past colonialism are the same ones struggling with today’s displacement and refugee crises.

So do we really have the right to complain about tens of thousands of devastated people arriving in peace, when Britons not so long ago arrived on their shores with violence and devastation?

History shows who the real invaders are.

Top photo: Asylum seekers crossing the English Channel. Credit: Sandor Csudai, Oxford Human Rights Hub

Bottom image: Painting by Francis Holman, Battle of Cape St. Vincent (1780). HMS Sandwich in the foreground. The Royal Navy was central to building and maintaining the British Empire.

• Join the discussion about this post on Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Instagram, BlueSky

So, what’s the answer?

The UK is caught up in the biggest refugee crisis since the Second World War.

Millions of people worldwide are fleeing war, torture, persecution and climate breakdown.

Only a relatively small fraction ever reaches Britain, but their arrival dominates the headlines.

Other European countries such as Germany, France and Italy consistently accept far more asylum seekers than the UK.

The UK is not even in the top tier of host nations – far poorer countries close to conflict zones host many more refugees and shoulder far greater responsibility.

And with increasing conflicts and the growing impact of climate change, the number of refugees worldwide will massively increase. It is neither practical nor reasonable for Britain, or any country, to turn its back on this problem.

Parties like Reform argue the “answer” is simple: deport them all, send them straight back. But that isn’t a real solution.

International law prohibits sending people back to danger.

Why? Because if every country turned its back on refugees, the result would be even more chaos, desperation, and human tragedy. 

These laws were written after the Second World War, when millions of Europeans themselves were displaced, to ensure this nightmare never happened again.

And there’s a moral question too: if the UK were under threat and we had to flee, wouldn’t we also want to reach a safe country, preferably one where we could speak the language, or where family already lived?

Indeed, those are the two main reasons why some – just some – refugees risk the treacherous journey across the English Channel.

Most of the world’s refugees never come to the UK, and most don’t want to. In relative terms, it is just a tiny few.

These desperate people don’t hand over their life savings to gangsters for a so-called ‘illegal’ and very dangerous crossing because they can’t be bothered to take a ferry or a plane.

The truth is there is no legal or regular route available to them – the rules state they can only claim asylum once on UK soil, not in advance of arriving.

And once assessed by UK authorities – a process that shockingly can take years – most are found to be genuine refugees fleeing war, torture, famine, and persecution.

So, what is the real answer? Pragmatic solutions exist:

• Provide safe and legal routes – so people can apply for asylum without risking their lives in dangerous crossings.
• End hotel use – convert empty public buildings or fund proper local housing.
• Clear the asylum backlog – process claims in weeks, not years.
• Let asylum seekers work – so they can pay their way and help the nation.
• Share responsibility – cooperate with France, the EU and the UN.
• Support local councils – fund communities that provide housing.
• Address root causes  – war, dictatorship and climate change.

This isn’t about being “weak” or “tough.” It’s about being fair, efficient, and humane.

The refugee crisis is global, and it’s only going to grow. No single country can solve it alone.

But Britain can choose whether to fuel division or show leadership. Isn’t it time we stopped shouting about blame and started talking about answers?

• Join the discussion about ‘the answer’ on Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Instagram, BlueSky 

BBC NEWSNIGHT’S MISLEADING REPORT ABOUT ASYLUM SEEKERS

On Thursday 28 August 2025, in a report about asylum seekers on BBC Newsnight, it was reported that there are an estimated 810,000 unauthorised migrants in the UK, with the implication that this included asylum seekers.

It is misleading to suggest that asylum seekers are part of the UK’s “unauthorised migrant” population.

According to the Migration Observatory, the estimate of 810,000 unauthorised migrants refers to people living in the UK without any current legal right to remain, such as those who overstayed visas or entered without permission.

Asylum seekers are not counted as “unauthorised”.  They have the legal right to remain in the UK while their cases are assessed, and most of those cases are found by the Home Office to be genuine.

According to official Home Office statistics, as of June 2025 there were around 70,500 asylum applications awaiting an initial decision, representing about 90,800 people. These individuals are legally present in the UK while their cases are processed.

By quoting the 810,000 figure in a segment about asylum seekers, Newsnight gave the misleading impression that asylum seekers are included in that number. This risks fuelling misunderstanding and prejudice.

• I have submitted a complaint to the BBC about this misleading report on Newsnight, because accuracy matters.

Complaint summary:

During Newsnight on 28 August 2025, in a segment about asylum seekers, the presenter asked:

“How many illegal immigrants are there in the United Kingdom?”

The reporter replied:

“There were around 10.7 million migrants in the UK, of which around 810,000 are thought to be unauthorised – so-called illegal migrants – according to estimates from the Migration Observatory.”

Placed in the context of a discussion about asylum seekers, this gave the misleading impression that asylum seekers are included in the 810,000 estimate.

According to the Migration Observatory, the figure of 810,000 unauthorised migrants refers to people with no legal right to remain, such as visa overstayers or those who entered without permission.

Asylum seekers are not counted as “unauthorised”.  They have the legal right to remain while their cases are decided, and most are later recognised as genuine refugees.

I have asked the BBC to acknowledge this error and clarify the correct meaning of the 810,000 figure.

• Update 5 September 2025:

BBC REJECTS MY COMPLAINT ON ASYLUM FIGURES

The BBC has replied to my complaint about the Newsnight broadcast on 28 August.

The BBC defended the report by their journalist Ben Chu and wrote:

“At no stage did he say asylum seekers were ‘illegal migrants’ or ‘unauthorised’. Considering this, we’re happy that Ben’s comments were accurate and clear.”

But this entirely misses the point. The entire segment was about asylum seekers. The presenter asked:

“How many illegal immigrants are there in the United Kingdom?”

Ben Chu then quoted Migration Observatory figures for “so-called illegal migrants” and a graphic was shown with the number of “unauthorised migrants.” The problem? Asylum seekers are not “unauthorised migrants”.

The Migration Observatory is explicit about this. By failing to make that clear, the programme conflated two unrelated categories and gave viewers the misleading impression that asylum seekers were included in the 810,000 estimate.

As I wrote in my response to the BBC:

“So I must ask: what have ‘unauthorised migrants’ to do with asylum seekers? Why introduce statistics about an unrelated category in the middle of a report about asylum seekers, without making absolutely clear to the audience that asylum seekers are not part of that figure?”

The BBC Editorial Guidelines require not only literal accuracy but also that audiences are not misled.  On this occasion, the broadcast failed that test.

I have asked the BBC to reconsider, and if necessary I will escalate my complaint to the Executive Complaints Unit.

• Join the discussion about BBC Newsnight’s misleading report on Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Instagram, BlueSky
• Video: Why human rights matter

The post Who can we really call invaders? appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP

“I strongly condemn these brutal attacks, a clear sign that Russia rejects peace and chooses terror,” said EU Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos.

In today's edition: France tilts toward China, Costa tours the capitals, Germany's National Security Council, Parliament curbs lobby access

Bringing the Western Balkans fully into the EU is not just about completing a political project. It’s about strengthening the Union’s capacity to defend itself, to act with autonomy, and to project stability