Border Imperialism in the Balkans: A Q&A with Nidžara Ahmetašević, Manja Petrovska, Sophie-Anne Bisiaux, and Lorenz Naegeli
How the European Union is funding the International Organization for Migration to enact brutal border operations in the Balkans.
The authors of the report Repackaging Imperialism: The EU-IOM Border Regime in the Balkans, published by the Amsterdam-based research and advocacy organization Transnational Institute, answer questions about the European Union border control regime, the buildup and privatization of surveillance infrastructure, and how the UN-related International Organization for Migration (IOM)—which describes itself as the “leading intergovernmental organization in the field of migration” that “works closely with governmental, intergovernmental, and non-governmental partners”—helps externalize the border to the Balkans, which has become a “testing ground” for EU policies and strategy.
“The Balkans,” the authors say, “previously a transit corridor for people traveling between Greece and the rest of the EU, has become a no-man’s-land where migrants are trapped in limbo behind the EU’s borders.”
Journalists and researchers Nidžara Ahmetašević, Manja Petrovska, Sophie-Anne Bisiaux, and Lorenz Naegeli explain the similarities between U.S. and EU border control and the resulting human rights abuses against people on the move, such as “being held in cage-like facilities, systemic violence in reception and detention centers, physical assaults, illegal deportations.” They also discuss the IOM’s contracting of both private security and high-tech militarized surveillance companies and why people in the U.S. should be concerned.
The Border Chronicle’s readership is knowledgeable when it comes to the U.S. border, but possibly not as much concerning the European Union. Could you speak generally to what is happening on the EU borders and the Balkans? Are there a lot of people crossing? Where are people coming from?
AUTHORS: There are many similarities in “migration management” between the U.S. and the EU. In both cases, the borders are sealed for the majority of the world, and people seeking safety and asylum are forced to use irregular ways to cross the borders, exposing them to human rights violations and violence.
As a transit area between the EU borders, the Balkans is a busy route.
People from the Middle East, North Africa, East Africa, Afghanistan, Russia, Cuba, Bangladesh, India, and many other countries are attempting to reach the Schengen Area countries of the EU by crossing through this region. Sadly, many people die trying to cross this route.
Before the so-called long summer of migration to Europe in 2015, the borders between Balkan countries were open to asylum seekers to pass through on their way to the EU. By 2016, however, the EU’s political objective to close the Balkan route was realized with assistance from the IOM, the EU’s primary partner in border security projects in the region. Since then, the Balkans—previously a transit corridor for people traveling between Greece and the rest of the EU—has become a no-man’s-land where migrants are trapped in limbo behind the EU’s borders.
For people trying to cross the Balkans to reach the EU, this journey has become exponentially more dangerous and deadly. People are left with no option but to rely on smuggling networks that have grown in sophistication and become increasingly expensive. The rugged terrain of the Balkans poses additional hazards for people trying to make it into the EU. They are forced to traverse mountains on foot, facing threats from unpredictable weather conditions, but also wild animals and dangerous river crossings necessitated by the need to evade police patrols. Reports of illegal and violent pushbacks are rampant across the region, and these have been well documented by grassroots groups. Many individuals who once dreamed of a life in the EU have found themselves stranded for years in the Balkans, where they are denied their right to seek asylum and are left without the most basic forms of protection.
How has the EU used the Balkans to test its migration policies, and what are those policies? How does this look on the ground in all aspects (surveillance, detention, etc.)? Can you put this in the context of imperialism?
Due to its geographical proximity, the European Union has utilized the Balkans as a testing ground for its border-externalization policies, a political strategy through which the EU aims to assert control over the borders of other countries and regulate movements across them. This practice, originating in the Balkans in the 1990s, has since expanded to encompass regions across Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and Latin America.
EU externalization is facilitated by engaging numerous nonstate actors, including organizations like the IOM, tasked with engineering or implementing EU migration control policies in third countries. In the Balkans, the EU essentially contracts the IOM, a self-declared humanitarian organization, to externalize its stringent border policies, pressuring regional countries to intensify border controls while providing financial and other support for these efforts. The IOM’s tasks range from helping draft new legislation to establishing camps and detention centers, investing in transnational surveillance technologies, providing training for local authorities, and financing EU police patrols to operate across the regions—all aimed at controlling and containing migration.
This embodies a modern-day form of imperialism, in which the EU exerts influence over the affairs of countries in the Balkans and beyond, establishing policies and conditions that align with its political and economic interests. As our report argues, through engaging the IOM, a UN-related agency, EU imperialism is repackaged and presented under the guise of humanitarianism and in line with international law. This obfuscates the true intent behind the EU-IOM partnership, permitting the EU to continue exerting and expanding its influence beyond its borders through a strategy that goes almost entirely unchecked.
Can you tell us a little bit more about the IOM? What do you mean by a “UN-related agency”? Are the IOM’s border operations in the Balkans funded by the European Union? Has this funding increased, and what are the budgets?
The IOM is an intergovernmental organization that primarily serves the interests of its donors, mainly Western bilateral agencies, functioning essentially as a “service provider” to help them enforce their migration agenda. The EU and the U.S. are currently the IOM’s largest donors. Despite being affiliated with the UN since 2016, the IOM is not a UN specialized agency, and therefore it is not accountable to the UN system or held to the same accountability and transparency standards as traditional UN agencies. This raises serious concerns when it comes to its involvement in deadly border security projects.
After the U.S., the EU and its member states are the biggest financiers of the IOM’s operations, and so the IOM has become one of its main partners in border externalization. The EU funds the IOM’s border security operations in the Balkans through pre-accession funding, a form of capacity-building assistance offered to prospective EU member states. Since 2015 there has been a huge increase in EU funding to the IOM for border control activities in the Balkans. The most notable example is Bosnia and Herzegovina, where funding for the IOM’s activities increased by 1505 percent from 2017 to 2020, reaching about 166 million euros. The basic logic of the EU-IOM relationship is that the EU designs an action plan in its own interest, the IOM is responsible for its implementation in a specific country, and the main partners are local and international border guards that receive technical equipment, funding, and personnel support in a mission designed to interrupt migration toward the Schengen Area.
In these border operations, have there been any human rights abuses documented, and what are they?
According to our report, yes. We mainly focused on violations in Bosnia and Herzegovina, where we discovered numerous cases of violence against migrants in IOM-run camps.
These incidents occurred in conditions that can only be described as inhumane, with individuals in camps lacking sufficient access to food, shelter, medical and psychological care, as well as basic hygiene facilities. The most vulnerable populations, including women, unaccompanied children, and the LGBTQ+ community, faced particular risks and were seriously lacking protections.
Furthermore, our investigation revealed the troubling use of EU public funds by IOM to support police, border guards, and private contractors, all of whom we found to be implicated in rights violations. Among the documented abuses were individuals being held in cage-like facilities, systemic violence in reception and detention centers, physical assaults, illegal deportations.
Additionally, we found instances in which equipment donated by the EU and IOM to local police forces was directly implicated in violent acts against migrants, including illegal pushbacks across borders. This is in addition to the troubling fact that people stuck in limbo in the Balkans are denied the ability to seek asylum.
Has the IOM contracted private companies, and if so, what significance does this have?
Yes, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, IOM has contracted private companies and individuals, many of whom we found to have dubious connections, criminal records, or were allegedly involved in corruption. Particularly concerning were the contracts with private security agencies, which operated in all of the IOM-run camps. We collected numerous reports of violent treatment against migrants by personnel employed by these security companies. These individuals lacked proper training to work with vulnerable populations, often resorting to excessive force and violence. Moreover, the working conditions provided by IOM were precarious, with employees of these security companies seriously overworked and lacking adequate training or psychological support.
These grave inadequacies raise serious concerns about the agency’s recruitment policies, which jeopardize the safety of migrants. Although the IOM no longer contracts private security agencies in Bosnia and Herzegovina, their presence persisted for many years without the IOM taking any responsibility for the events that occurred while they were still under contract. Additionally, IOM contracted companies to procure high-tech militarized equipment for borders and border guards. This raises additional concerns, especially as the EU expands its biometric data-collection scheme at Balkan borders. The EU’s financial support for Balkan states to facilitate deportations and so-called “voluntary” returns has sparked fears that the region could evolve into a deportation hub. This procurement model, observed in the Balkans, mirrors practices in other countries where IOM operates.
Beyond the European context, what significance does this have globally? Should people from the U.S. be concerned?
People in the U.S. should indeed be concerned, as similar strategies employed by the EU are also being utilized by the U.S., Canada, Australia, and numerous other states worldwide. The ability of states to contract international organizations, many of which portray themselves as humanitarian actors, to execute violent and deadly (border) control projects poses a threat to our collective security. It’s not far-fetched or conspiratorial to imagine that the practices and technologies used by Western countries to control and surveil noncitizens will also be turned toward the citizens of these states as well.
Fantastic article, Todd. Thanks, as always.
Agree…same culprits I am guessing.