2026年10月2日 / 美国东部时间中午12:33 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
五个欧盟国家正推进计划，将申请被驳回的 asylum 寻求者遣送至欧盟以外的第三国，地点可能在非洲。此前欧盟本周批准了相关新规，为这一做法扫清了障碍。
希腊、德国、奥地利、丹麦和荷兰已就建立欧盟外“遣返中心”的共同框架达成一致。对于那些已用尽在欧洲居留的合法途径、且无法被遣返回原籍国的人，可被转移至这些中心。
据法新社报道，丹麦内政大臣莫滕·伯兹科夫（Morten Bødskov）周四对记者表示：“在遣返中心这件事上，进展非常顺利。我们正朝着正确的方向前进。”
他此前曾表示，丹麦预计“将在2027年内做好准备，将首批非常规移民转移至欧盟以外的伙伴国家”。
希腊移民部长萨诺斯·普莱夫里斯（Thanos Plevris）告诉《政客》新闻网，希腊有望在明年上半年启动试点项目。
科斯塔斯·梅塔萨克斯/法新社/盖蒂图片社
目前欧盟遣返中心的潜在目的地尚未确定，但有报道称卢旺达可能成为该项目的合作伙伴之一。希腊政府在相关计划声明中表示，遣返中心将设立在安全的第三国，“尤其是在非洲大陆”。
欧盟本身将遣返中心的构想定位为对非常规移民的潜在威慑手段。欧盟理事会（欧盟执政机构）2025年10月发布的一份讨论文件称，这些中心可以“激励自愿遣返”，因为不遵守遣返命令的移民可能会被转移至遣返中心。
文件还称，该政策也可能阻止没有有效庇护申请理由的人踏上前往欧洲的危险旅程。
欧盟本周通过的新规建立了全欧盟范围内的遣返法律框架，并允许成员国与欧盟以外的国家达成双边或单边协议，但附带若干条件。
根据新规，“任何此类协议或安排只能与尊重国际人权标准和国际法原则（包括不驱回原则）的非欧盟国家缔结”。不驱回原则保障任何人不得被遣返至可能面临酷刑、残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇、惩罚或其他无法弥补伤害的国家。
欧盟效仿美国和英国的做法
特朗普政府曾积极推动将无证移民遣送至第三国的做法。据哥伦比亚广播公司新闻获得的美国政府内部文件显示，今年8月，美国在10天内将100多名被遣返者送往8个非洲国家。
这些被遣返者被送往的目的地包括利比里亚、卢旺达、斯威士兰和塞拉利昂等非洲国家。
希腊移民部长普莱夫里斯曾对特朗普政府的移民政策表示赞赏。
“我是特朗普总统的支持者，”他今年8月在接受布雷特巴特新闻网采访时表示，“但如果要问他做过的最棒的事情是什么，那就是改变了美国的移民政策，因为现在我们在欧洲也有了新的移民政策。”
不过，此前已有其他欧洲政府尝试过将移民遣送至第三国，结果喜忧参半。
“移民政策的难点没有捷径可走”
英国前保守党政府曾试图将通过非常规路线抵达的 asylum 寻求者送往卢旺达，在当地审理其庇护申请。但该方案在2023年正式启动前就被英国最高法院裁定为非法，理由是难民可能最终被遣返至面临迫害的国家。
次年，保守党下台后，新任工党政府正式放弃了这一政策。英国内政部数据显示，截至2024年6月，英国已为卢旺达方案投入7.15亿英镑（近9.5亿美元），但没有任何一名 asylum 寻求者被强制转移。仅有4人通过该项目自愿前往卢旺达。
牛津大学移民观察站高级研究员彼得·沃尔什（Peter Walsh）周五对哥伦比亚广播公司新闻网表示：“其中一个教训可能是，即使第三国看起来比卢旺达争议小得多，欧洲各国政府也应该预料到会面临诉讼。”
“这些政策通常被宣传为威慑措施，其前提是足够多的人相信他们确实有被转移的现实可能性，”沃尔什说，“如果只有极少数人能够被转移，那么威慑效果可能会大打折扣。”
“从卢旺达事件中可以得到的更广泛教训是，将移民问题外部化并不是绕过移民政策难点的捷径，”他表示，“这可能会将部分问题转移到其他地区，但各国政府仍然需要应对司法程序、个人权利、行政能力、可能不配合遣返的国家，以及巨额成本等问题。”
推动建立遣返中心是欧洲各国收紧移民政策整体努力的一部分，当前各国政府面临着加大力度遣返无合法居留权人员的巨大压力。
总部位于布鲁塞尔的右翼智库“欧洲自由与主权倡议”政策主任雅各布·雷诺兹（Jacob Reynolds）称，欧盟批准建立这些遣返中心的决定是“朝着管控边境、遣返无权在欧停留人员迈出的可喜一步”。
但他补充道，“如同欧盟长期以来的做法那样，将非法移民问题外包给第三国，可能会回避更广泛的问题：欧盟各国边境缺乏管控。”
他呼吁采取“更根本性的行动”来解决“欧洲各国对 asylum 寻求者的宽松待遇”，并表示在这一点实现之前，“问题将无法得到解决”。
5 European nations follow U.S. with plans for third-country deportations as EU approves migrant “return hubs”
October 2, 2026 / 12:33 PM EDT / CBS News
Five European Union countries are pushing ahead with plans to start deporting asylum seekers whose applications are rejected to third countries outside the bloc, potentially in Africa, after the EU approved new rules this week that clear the way for the practice.
Greece, Germany, Austria, Denmark and the Netherlands have agreed on a common framework to establish “return hubs” outside the EU to which people who have exhausted their legal options to remain in Europe could be transferred if they cannot be sent back to their own countries of origin.
“When it comes to return hubs, it’s progressing very well,” Danish Interior Minister Morten Bødskov told reporters Thursday, according to AFP. “We are moving in the right direction.”
He previously said Denmark expected “to be ready to transfer the first irregular migrants to a partner country outside the EU within 2027.”
Greek Migration Minister Thanos Plevris told Politico that Greece expects to have a pilot project in place in the first half of next year.
Migrants wait to be transferred at the port of Agia Galini after being rescued by Greek coast guard on the island of Crete, in a Dec. 19, 2025, file photo. Costas METAXAKIS/AFP/Getty
No potential destinations for EU return hubs have been confirmed, although Rwanda has been reported as a possible partner in the project. A Greek government statement on the plans said the hubs would be established in safe third countries, “particularly on the African continent.”
The EU itself has presented the idea of return hubs as a potential deterrent to irregular immigration. A discussion paper published by the EU’s governing European Council in October 2025 said the hubs could “incentivize voluntary returns,” because migrants who fail to comply with a deportation order could face transfer to a hub instead.
It said the policy could also discourage people without a valid asylum claim from making dangerous journeys to Europe.
The rules adopted this week by the EU establish a bloc-wide legal framework for returns and allow member states to conclude bilateral or unilateral agreements with countries outside the bloc, but with stipulations.
Under the rules, “any such agreement or arrangement may only be concluded with a non-EU country that respects international human rights standards and principles of international law, including the principle of non-refoulement,” which guarantees that no individual can be sent back to a country where they would face torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, punishment or other irreparable harm.
EU follows U.S. and U.K. examples
The Trump administration has enthusiastically embraced the use of third-country deportations to remove undocumented migrants from the United States. More than 100 deportees were sent to eight African countries over a 10-day period in August, according to internal U.S. government documents obtained by CBS News.
The deportees were sent to destinations including the African nations of Liberia, Rwanda, Eswatini and Sierra Leone.
Plevris, Greece’s migration minister, has praised the Trump administration’s approach.
“I am a fan of President Trump,” he told Breitbart in August. “But if you ask me what was the best thing he did, it was change the migration policy of the USA, because now we have a new migration policy also in Europe.”
Other European governments have experimented with deportations to third nations before, however, with mixed results.
“No shortcut around the difficult parts of migration policy”
Britain’s former Conservative Party government sought to send asylum seekers who arrived through irregular routes to Rwanda to have their claims processed there. The U.K. Supreme Court ruled the scheme unlawful in 2023, before it ever got going, over the risk that refugees could ultimately be returned to countries where they faced persecution.
The following year, the policy was formally abandoned by the new Labour Party government after the Conservatives were voted out of power. The British Home Office said £715 million (almost $950 million) had been spent on the Rwanda program by June 2024, and no asylum seekers were forcibly relocated. Four people traveled voluntarily to Rwanda under the program.
“One lesson may be that European governments should expect litigation, even where the third country looks considerably less controversial than Rwanda,” Peter Walsh, a senior researcher at the University of Oxford’s Migration Observatory, told CBS News on Friday.
“These policies are often justified as deterrence measures, and that assumes a sufficiently large share of people believe there is a realistic chance they will actually be transferred,” Walsh said. “If only a very small proportion can be moved, the deterrent may be much less credible.”
“The broader lesson from Rwanda is that externalization is not a shortcut around the difficult parts of migration policy,” he said. “It may relocate some of those difficulties geographically, but governments still have to deal with courts, individual rights, administrative capacity, countries that may not cooperate with returns, and substantial costs”
The push for return hubs is part of a broader effort by European nations to tighten their immigration policies amid intense pressure on governments to increase the number of people without a legal right to remain who are actually removed.
Jacob Reynolds, policy director at the Freedom and Sovereignty Initiative Europe, a right-wing think tank based in Brussels, called the EU decision to embrace these hubs a “welcome step towards gaining control of our borders and removing those who have no right to be here.”
But he added that “outsourcing the problem of illegal migration to third countries — as the EU has long done — risks avoiding the broader problem: the lack of control over EU countries’ borders.”
He called for “much more fundamental action” to address “the generous regimes available to asylum seekers in Europe,” and said until that happened, “the problem will not be solved.”
发表回复