Feed aggregator

A főképviselőnek az Európai Unió nevében tett nyilatkozata egyes harmadik országoknak az ukrajnai helyzetet destabilizáló orosz intézkedések miatt hozott korlátozó intézkedésekről szóló 2014/512/KKBP határozat módosításáról szóló, 2025. július 18-i (KKBP) 2025/1495 tanácsi határozathoz történő csatlakozásáról.

A főképviselőnek az Európai Unió nevében tett nyilatkozata egyes harmadik országoknak az Ukrajna területi integritását, szuverenitását és függetlenségét aláásó vagy fenyegető intézkedések miatti korlátozó intézkedésekről szóló 2014/145/KKBP határozat módosításáról szóló, 2025. július 18-i (KKBP) 2025/1478 tanácsi határozathoz történő csatlakozásáról.

A főképviselőnek az Európai Unió nevében tett nyilatkozata egyes harmadik országoknak a belarusz helyzetre és Belarusznak az Ukrajna elleni orosz agresszióban való részvételére tekintettel hozott korlátozó intézkedésekről szóló 2012/642/KKBP határozat módosításáról szóló, 2025. július 18-i (KKBP) 2025/1471 tanácsi határozathoz történő csatlakozásáról.

A főképviselőnek az Európai Unió nevében tett nyilatkozata egyes harmadik országoknak a belarusz helyzetre és Belarusznak az Ukrajna elleni orosz agresszióban való részvételére tekintettel hozott korlátozó intézkedésekről szóló 2012/642/KKBP határozat végrehajtásáról szóló, 2025. július 18-i (KKBP) 2025/1461 tanácsi végrehajtási határozathoz történő csatlakozásáról.

Az EU nyilatkozatot adott ki, amelyben üdvözölte az Örményország–Azerbajdzsán békemegállapodás parafálását.

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.

A Tanács végrehajtási határozatot fogadott el, amelyben engedélyezte az Ukrajna-eszköz Ukrajna-terve keretében nyújtott negyedik részlet folyósítását.

Az EU nyilatkozatot adott ki a világ őslakos népeinek nemzetközi napja alkalmából. A nyilatkozatban az Európai Unió újólag megerősíti szilárd elkötelezettségét az őslakos népeknek az Unió határain belüli és túli támogatása, valamint az őslakos népek jogairól szóló ENSZ-nyilatkozatban (UNDRIP) meghatározott jogaik tiszteletben tartása, védelme és érvényesítése iránt.

A főképviselőnek az Európai Unió nevében tett nyilatkozata egyes harmadik országoknak a Szudán stabilitását és politikai átmenetét aláásó tevékenységekre tekintettel hozott korlátozó intézkedésekről szóló (KKBP) 2023/2135 határozat módosításáról szóló, 2025. július 18-i (KKBP) 2025/1481 tanácsi határozathoz történő csatlakozásáról.

A főképviselőnek az Európai Unió nevében tett nyilatkozata egyes harmadik országoknak a líbiai helyzetre tekintettel hozott korlátozó intézkedésekről szóló (KKBP) 2015/1333 határozat végrehajtásáról szóló, 2025. július 29-i (EU) 2025/1705 tanácsi végrehajtási határozathoz történő csatlakozásáról.

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.

Aujourd’hui dans Les Capitales : La Russie attaque le bâtiment de la délégation de l'UE en Ukraine, l’Allemagne crée un conseil national de sécurité, une première historique, l’Allemagne critique Dassault pour avoir voulu s’approprier le projet d’avions de combat FCAS.

The post Les Capitales : La Russie attaque le bâtiment de la délégation de l’UE en Ukraine appeared first on Euractiv FR.

Des images satellite, des témoignages de témoins oculaires et des images vérifiées obtenues par la BBC révèlent de nouveaux détails sur l'attaque israélienne contre le complexe pénitentiaire d'Evin en Iran et sur les personnes tuées.

« La délégation de l’UE à Kiev a été endommagée par les frappes russes d’aujourd’hui sur des zones civiles », a affirmé la commissaire européenne chargée de l’Élargissement, Marta Kos, ce jeudi 28 août.

The post Des frappes russes endommagent le bâtiment de la délégation de l’UE en Ukraine appeared first on Euractiv FR.

A nyilvánosság segítségét kéri a rendőrség a kassai Mária Kaličová (52) és 17 éves lányai – Zuzana Barošová és Júlia Barošová – megtalálásához. Az asszonyt és a lányait augusztus 15-én látták legutóbb Kassán. A lányok apja aznap bízta őket az édesanyjukra, este kellett volna hazamenniük, de azóta sem kerültek elő.

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP

Source : © European Union, 2025 - EP

The television and video recording studio of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty's Afghan service, Azadi Radio, in Prague, Czech Republic. Azadi Radio broadcasts to Afghanistan in Pashto and Dari languages. Credit: Bashir Ahmad Gwakh/IPS

By Bashir Ahmad Gwakh
PRAGUE, Aug 28 2025 (IPS)

Ahmad Siyar works in road construction in Balkh province. He wears a safety helmet to protect himself from debris constantly falling from the mountain where the road is being built. Once, he wore the same type of helmet for a very different reason. He was reporting from various parts of northern Afghanistan. Back then, his helmet bore the word “Journalist” in both Dari and English.

“We wore journalists’ helmets to protect ourselves and tell the warring sides that I am a journalist. It was a difficult but golden era. I loved reporting and being the voice of the people. But after the Taliban took over Afghanistan, the restrictions and financial problems became overwhelming, and I had to quit,” he said. “Now I work as a construction worker. It’s not an easy job, but I must do it, as I have no other option. I am the sole breadwinner of the family.”

Siyar, a father of three, is not the only journalist who has suffered under the Taliban regime. Since returning to power on August 15, 2021, the Taliban government has issued at least 21 directives regulating media activity through June 2025. These directives impose a wide range of restrictions, including a ban on women appearing on state-run television and radio, prohibitions on covering protests, and a ban on music.

These restrictions, along with the ongoing financial crisis and lack of funding, have led to the shutdown of 350 independent media outlets under Taliban rule. Before August 2021, there were over 600 independent media outlets in Afghanistan. According to data reviewed by IPS, these figures are based on weekly and monthly reports from organizations advocating for media freedom, such as the International Federation of Journalists, Reporters Without Borders, and the Committee to Protect Journalists.

“Four years after the Taliban takeover, Afghanistan’s once vibrant free press is a ghost of its former self. The situation of press freedom remains dire in Afghanistan, while exiled Afghan journalists face growing risks of arbitrary arrests, including those in Pakistan and Iran,” Beh Lih Yi, Regional Director, Asia-Pacific at CJP, told IPS.

Afghanistan’s largest independent news network, TOLOnews, had to let go of 25 journalists in June 2024. The layoffs followed an order from the Taliban to shut down certain programmes deemed “misleading” and “propaganda against the Taliban government,” according to a senior editor at TOLOnews. Fearing retaliation, the editor requested anonymity. “Beyond the constant stream of restrictive orders and lack of access to information, our funds are drying up. We can no longer have full and free news broadcasts to our people,” he added.

The Taliban have imposed strict rules on how women must dress and appear in the media. Women are barred from participating in plays and television entertainment. The Taliban have also prohibited interviews with opposition figures. Afghan media are no longer allowed to broadcast international television content. The release of films and TV series has been halted. Collaboration with media outlets in exile is also banned.

Yi believes these are the darkest days for media in Afghanistan. “Since the fall of Kabul, the Taliban have escalated a crackdown on the media in Afghanistan with censorship, assaults, arbitrary arrests, and restrictions on female journalists. The Taliban and its intelligence agency GDI continue to crack down on Afghan journalists on a daily basis,” she said.

Most Afghan women journalists have fled the country. Those who remain live in fear. Farida Habibi (not her real name), a journalist in Kabul, chose not to flee because she could not leave her disabled father behind. She now works in online media after the Taliban declared her on-air voice “un-Islamic”.

“We live in depression, to be honest. The environment is suffocating. I can’t go out freely, and my salary is very low,” she said.

The Taliban’s Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice has also banned the publication of images depicting living beings. Since the majority of these rules do not specify penalties, the Taliban forces use this ambiguity to punish journalists arbitrarily.

A 2024 report by the Afghanistan Journalists Centre (AFJC), an independent watchdog, documented 703 cases of human rights violations against media professionals between August 2021 and December 2024. These violations included arbitrary arrest and detention, torture, threats, and intimidation by Taliban forces.

Similarly, a 2024 report by the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) condemned the Taliban for “systematically dismantling the right to a free press.”

“Journalists and media workers in Afghanistan operate under vague rules, unsure of what they can or cannot report, and constantly risk intimidation and arbitrary detention for perceived criticism,” said Roza Otunbayeva, head of UNAMA. “For any country, a free press is not a choice but a necessity. What we are witnessing in Afghanistan is the systematic dismantling of that necessity.”

Meanwhile, the Taliban government denies any wrongdoing and claims it is committed to supporting journalists. Speaking to reporters in Kabul on July 2, Khabib Ghafran, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Information and Culture, said the Taliban support a free media but warned that “nobody can cross the Islamic red lines,” without providing further details. He added that the government is working on establishing a financial support fund for journalists.

IPS UN Bureau Report

 

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById({js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs');   Related Articles

• Afghan Women Defy Taliban Repression With Underground Protests
• Malala: ‘Honest Conversations on Girls’ Education Start by Exposing the Worst Violations’