The European Commission has opened technical-level discussions with Taliban representatives in Brussels to arrange deportations of Afghan nationals back to Afghanistan—a move that 20 member states requested but that Portugal did not sign onto. Human rights organizations now call the initiative reckless and legally indefensible.
Portugal's Position: Unlike Germany, Sweden, Austria, and 17 other EU countries, Portugal was not among the signatories of the October 2025 letter calling for coordinated deportation mechanisms. This distinction is significant for Portuguese residents and Afghan nationals living in the country, as it signals that the Portuguese government has not formally backed the coordinated deportation framework being negotiated in Brussels.
Why This Matters
• Deportation machinery is moving forward: The European Union coordinated a meeting in June 2026 with a five-member Taliban delegation to discuss the "operational" logistics of returning Afghans convicted of serious crimes or deemed security threats.
• Legal and ethical flashpoint: Amnesty International, the United Nations Human Rights Office, and 33 Members of the European Parliament—including Portugal's Catarina Martins—warn the EU risks legitimizing a regime accused of systematic torture, forced disappearances, and gender apartheid.
• Portugal and other member states face ongoing pressure: While the European Commission insists these talks are purely technical and do not recognize the Taliban, critics argue that coordinating returns to a country the UN considers unsafe contradicts the bloc's own asylum and human rights law.
The Brussels Meeting and What Was Discussed
On a Tuesday in late June, Belgium issued one-day visas to a Taliban delegation that sat down with European Commission officials and representatives from 15 member states. According to Markus Lammert, the Commission's spokesperson for democracy, the agenda centered on document issuance, identity verification, and the "practical modalities" for repatriating individuals who either committed serious crimes or pose a security risk. The Commission stressed that the encounter does not constitute formal recognition of the Taliban government.
Swedish Migration Minister Johan Forssell co-chaired the session alongside Commission representatives. Sweden has emerged as one of the most vocal proponents within the bloc for accelerating Afghan deportations, with Forssell publicly stating that convicted criminals and security threats must be removed from Swedish territory. Germany and Belgium have also taken leading roles; Germany already operates up to three charter flights per month to Afghanistan and has deported roughly 200 Afghans since August 2024, with another 100 awaiting removal orders in German detention facilities.
The initiative traces back to an October 2025 letter signed by 20 EU member states—including Austria, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, and Slovakia—calling on the Commission to establish coordinated mechanisms for voluntary and forced returns of Afghans without legal residence or deemed threats to public order.
Amnesty International's Objection and UN Warnings
Amnesty International issued a formal statement condemning the Brussels talks, declaring that Afghanistan "cannot in any way be considered a safe country for return" and that this policy "will endanger the lives of those repatriated, as repeatedly highlighted by various UN bodies."
Eve Geddie, director of Amnesty's European Institutions Office, reminded the Commission that images of EU personnel fleeing Kabul in August 2021 "are still fresh in our memory." She described it as "inadmissible that the EU is now attempting to deport people to Afghanistan, which has since become even more dangerous."
The organization emphasized that the EU has repeatedly condemned the Taliban's abuses and that the UN Human Rights Council established an independent investigative mechanism for Afghanistan in October 2025. Amnesty argued that coordinating deportations contradicts the bloc's own criteria for dialogue with the Taliban and ignores "the very real and well-documented risks" facing any returnee: persecution, forced disappearance, arbitrary detention, torture, and reprisals under Taliban rule.
Volker Türk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, issued a warning in May 2026 about the "serious risks" to which returned individuals are exposed. The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) have both cautioned that forced returnees—especially ethnic and religious minorities, women, girls, journalists, and human rights activists—face Taliban retribution upon arrival.
Parliamentary and Civil Society Pushback
Thirty-three Members of the European Parliament sent a letter to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Parliament President Roberta Metsola, expressing "the deepest condemnation and absolute rejection" of the decision to receive Taliban officials in Brussels. The letter, signed by Catarina Martins of Portugal and lawmakers from across the political spectrum, called the talks a "betrayal of the EU's fundamental values" and accused the Commission of legitimizing the Afghan regime and discrediting the Union globally.
In May 2026, the European Parliament as a body expressed regret over the proposed invitation and reiterated its call for non-recognition and non-normalization of the Taliban.
Portuguese Civil Society and Government Response
The Portuguese Council for Refugees (CPR) joined a coalition of Afghan and European civil society organizations in issuing a joint declaration urging the EU to reject cooperation agreements that facilitate deportations. The CPR's statement emphasized that forced returns contradict Portugal's commitments under international humanitarian law and the 1951 Refugee Convention, to which Portugal is a signatory. The organization has raised specific concerns about vulnerable populations, including women and children fleeing gender-based persecution, as well as political activists and journalists facing Taliban retribution.
Beyond the CPR, other Portuguese human rights organizations, including Portuguese Amnesty International, have voiced opposition to the deportation framework. However, the Portuguese government has not issued an official public statement explicitly addressing its decision not to sign the October 2025 letter or clarifying its position on the ongoing Brussels talks.
Portugal's March 2026 immigration law reforms, introduced by the Ministry of Internal Administration, accelerated removal procedures for undocumented migrants. These changes were positioned as measures to improve administrative efficiency but raised concerns among civil society about their compatibility with asylum protections.
What This Means for Residents and Asylum Seekers in Portugal
For Afghans living in Portugal—whether as asylum seekers, recognized refugees, or undocumented migrants—the Brussels talks signal a potential hardening of EU-wide deportation policy, despite Portugal's non-signatory status.
Portugal's March 2026 immigration law changes introduced faster removal timelines for people in irregular status, managed by the Ministry of Internal Administration through the State Secretariat for Immigration and Border Control. However, the government has not publicly committed to the coordinated deportation framework being negotiated with the Taliban.
Afghan nationals represent one of the largest groups seeking asylum in Portugal and across the EU. While specific current figures for Afghan asylum seekers in Portugal are not publicly available in recent official datasets, the European Asylum Support Office (EASO) reported that nearly one million Afghan applications were filed across the EU bloc between 2013 and 2024, with roughly half approved. Portugal's asylum approval rates for Afghan applicants have historically ranged between 40–60%, though exact current statistics require consultation with the Institute for Social Support (Instituto da Segurança Social) or official immigration authorities.
Those whose claims are rejected may face intensified pressure to return, particularly if they have criminal convictions or are flagged as security concerns. However, legal advocates stress that the principle of non-refoulement—the prohibition on returning anyone to a place where they face torture, persecution, or serious harm—remains binding under both EU asylum law and the 1951 Refugee Convention, to which Portugal is a party. Any deportation to Afghanistan would need to withstand scrutiny under these frameworks, and courts in several member states, including Portugal, have halted removals on safety grounds.
If You're an Afghan Resident in Portugal: If you are facing removal proceedings or have concerns about your immigration status, know that Portugal has not joined the EU deportation request and that fundamental protection principles remain in effect. The Portuguese Council for Refugees (CPR) offers free legal assistance and can be reached through their website or by contacting partner organizations. You have the right to legal representation in asylum and removal proceedings, and if you believe your safety would be at risk if returned to Afghanistan, you can challenge removal orders through Portuguese courts. Organizations like the Portuguese Amnesty International also provide guidance on your rights.
The Broader International Picture
Outside the EU, Canada has taken a contrasting approach. The country committed to resettling 40,000 vulnerable Afghan refugees and met that target by October 2023, allocating 21 M CAD through the IOM to support displaced Afghans in Central Asia and Pakistan. Canada's policy reflects a commitment to the Refugee Convention and individual asylum rights.
Australia, by comparison, operates a restrictive system that includes mandatory detention and offshore processing for asylum seekers who arrive without a valid visa. In August 2021, Australia capped Afghan visas at 3,000 per year, citing security concerns. The policy has drawn international criticism but remains in force.
Globally, the majority of Afghan refugees—5.3 M registered as of October 2025—remain in neighboring countries, primarily Iran and Pakistan, where conditions are often precarious and legal protections limited.
Germany and Sweden Lead the Push
Germany stands out as the most active deportation advocate within the EU. Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt stated that individuals convicted of serious crimes "must be returned to their country of origin" and pledged to implement the policy consistently. Germany has already established a charter flight schedule averaging up to three departures per month and maintains detention facilities for Afghans awaiting removal.
Sweden has been "very proactive," according to diplomatic sources, in ensuring that EU-level mechanisms facilitate returns. The Swedish government's position is that criminal convictions and security threats override humanitarian considerations, a stance that has placed Stockholm alongside Berlin and Brussels at the center of the deportation push.
Spain, by contrast, did not sign the October 2025 letter and has publicly defended immigration as beneficial to the country. France has not explicitly opposed the initiative but emphasizes that Taliban compliance with international obligations is a prerequisite for any reintegration of Afghanistan into the global community.
The Taliban's Position and Broader Context
Taliban authorities have publicly called for the deportation of Afghan exiles from Europe, framing the issue as one of sovereignty and repatriation of citizens. The regime has offered assurances that returnees will not face harm, but UN agencies, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and other monitors have documented systematic abuses since the Taliban retook power in August 2021, including severe restrictions on the rights of women and girls, extrajudicial killings, and the suppression of dissent.
The European Commission maintains that technical discussions do not amount to political recognition and that the EU continues to condemn Taliban abuses. Critics counter that operational cooperation inevitably confers a degree of legitimacy and that the EU risks complicity in human rights violations if deportations proceed.
Looking Ahead
The technical talks in Brussels mark a significant shift in EU migration policy. For the first time since the Taliban's return to power, European officials are sitting across the table from regime representatives to negotiate the logistics of forced returns. Whether this leads to a formalized agreement—or collapses under legal, political, and humanitarian pressure—will determine the fate of thousands of Afghan nationals currently living in Europe, including in Portugal.
For now, the European Commission insists the contacts are narrowly technical. The 20 member states that requested them argue that public safety justifies engagement. Opponents warn that the cost—measured in lives endangered and principles abandoned—is too high. What remains certain is that Portugal's non-signatory status does not insulate the country from the consequences of an EU-wide agreement, should one materialize. Afghan residents and advocates in Portugal will be watching closely to see how the Portuguese government responds to any formalized deportation protocol emerging from Brussels.
