Connect with us

World

Border controls are 'last resort,' Brussels says after Solingen attack

Published

on

Border controls are 'last resort,' Brussels says after Solingen attack

The spectre of additional border controls looms over the Schengen Area after a deadly attack in Solingen, Germany.

ADVERTISEMENT

The European Commission is treading a fine line following the mass stabbing that left three people dead in Solingen, Germany, balancing, on the one hand, the prerogative of national security, which member states zealously guard, and, on the other, the integrity of the Schengen Area, which the executive is compelled to preserve.

The passport-free zone of 450 million citizens, widely considered one of the most tangible achievements of European integration, has been under constant pressure since the 2015 migration crisis, when countries introduced temporary border checks that were, in certain cases, illegally prolonged.

Eight Schengen countries, including Germany, currently conduct checks.

Any border control should be “proportionate” and remain “exceptional, strictly limited in time and last resort,” a Commission spokesperson said on Tuesday, noting the measure should always be justified by a “serious threat to public policy or internal security.”

The knife attack in Solingen, claimed by the so-called Islamic State, was carried out by a Syrian national whose asylum application had been previously rejected and had been ordered to return to Bulgaria, the first EU country of entry.

Advertisement

The failure to carry out the deportation has triggered a blame game between German authorities and reignited the politically explosive debate on migration, which Brussels had hoped to have contained after completing an all-encompassing reform in May.

“We must do everything we can to ensure that such things will never happen again in our country,” Chancellor German Scholz said, promising to speed up the number of deportations. The EU has long struggled to address this thorny issue due to, among other factors, a lack of cooperation from countries of origin.

“We will have to do everything we can to ensure that those who cannot and are not allowed to stay here in Germany are repatriated and deported,” Scholz added.

Politicians on the right quickly seized the moment to excoriate Scholz and his deeply unpopular three-party coalition, demanding forceful action to curb irregular migration.

Friedrich Merz, leader of the centre-right Democratic Union of Germany (CDU), proposed a moratorium on the admission of Syrian and Afghan refugees, the two largest groups of nationalities who seek shelter in Germany, and the establishment of permanent checks on German borders. “Enough is enough!” Merz wrote.

Advertisement

Alice Weidel, co-chair of the far-right AfD party, has voiced similar ideas, saying the moratorium should last “at least” five years. “In addition, the borders must be closed and the groups of people with the highest crime rate – especially Afghans, Syrians and Iraqis who are staying in Germany illegally – must be deported,” Weidel told the ZDF channel.

Focus on the Pact

Asked about these ideas, which, if implemented, would collide with EU norms, the European Commission refused to comment and insisted its main focus was to implement the reform of migration and asylum policy, otherwise known as the New Pact.

The five laws under the Pact will take two years to enter into force.

The overhaul foresees that, when an asylum claim is rejected, the applicant will receive at the same time a return decision, closing the gap between the two procedures. Frontex, the bloc’s border guard agency, will support member states to carry out deportations successfully. The last word, however, will still lie with the country of origin or transit that is asked to take back the migrant – and can refuse to do so.

The EU’s return rate hovers around 30%.

Advertisement
ADVERTISEMENT

Crucially, governments are, under international law, forbidden from sending back asylum seekers to countries where their lives and human rights would be at risk. A debate among member states on whether it would be appropriate to repatriate migrants to some parts of Syria has gained traction in recent months but without any resolution.

“This is an ongoing work. So far, the conditions (in Syria) have not been met yet,” a Commission spokesperson said.

The New Pact envisions the possibility of drafting an EU-wide list of “safe countries of origin” to ensure deportation orders are recognised uniformly across the bloc. As of today, each member state has its own list of “safe countries,” a fragmented landscape that has caused occasional disagreements between governments.

“Having such a list could possibly facilitate returning persons to countries of origin that are then defined as safe,” Alberto-Horst Neidhardt, a senior policy analyst at the European Policy Centre (EPC), told Euronews.

ADVERTISEMENT

But the fact that the catalogue was not put forward at the same time as the legislation, and therefore not included in the negotiations, hints at an uphill battle to get all 27 member states on the same page.

“It’s very unlikely that there will be a very strong consensus any time soon on what countries could be on that list,” Neidhardt said. “Particularly, if you look at countries that are at the center of the media attention at the moment, such as Syria or Afghanistan. There are very, very different positions among member states on this issue.”

The concept of “safe countries” has been challenged by NGOs who argue minority groups can still face persecution in war-free nations.

Advertisement

Still, the matter is expected to remain high on the agenda. In her guidelines for a second mandate, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has promised to table a “new common approach” on returns to ensure decisions “are mutually recognised across Europe.”

ADVERTISEMENT

World

US tells ASML it is concerned China may have top chip tool, Bloomberg News reports

Published

on

US tells ASML it is concerned China may have top chip tool, Bloomberg News reports
U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick ​outlined concerns to ‌Dutch chip-equipment firm ASML’s senior leaders ​that one ​of its top-of-the-line machines ⁠may have ​made its way into ​China, in violation of U.S.-led export restrictions, ​Bloomberg News ​reported on Thursday.
Continue Reading

World

Iran hardliner behind US deal warns Tehran won’t honor agreement if Trump fails to deliver

Published

on

Iran hardliner behind US deal warns Tehran won’t honor agreement if Trump fails to deliver

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Iran’s hardline parliament speaker and key negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warned that Tehran would not honor its commitments under a newly signed memorandum with the U.S. if Washington fails to uphold its side of the deal, according to the media arm of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. 

“If the United States does not honor its commitments, there is no way Iran will honor its own commitments,” Ghalibaf said.

Ghalibaf’s warning was echoed Thursday by Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force commander Esmail Qaani, who threatened the U.S. in remarks translated by MEMRI TV, saying, “Americans should know their place and avoid confronting the Muslims.” 

Qaani added that “Trump is trembling” and warned that the U.S. “should fear not only Hormuz and Bab al-Mandeb, but many other locations as well.”

Advertisement

MEET IRAN’S HARDLINE SPEAKER WHO THREATENED TO BURN US FORCES — REPORTEDLY TEHRAN’S POINT MAN FOR TALKS

The warnings came after President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian Wednesday digitally signed a copy of the memorandum aimed at ending the war and resuming the flow of traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran’s hardline parliament speaker and key negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warned that Tehran would not honor its commitments under a newly signed memorandum with the U.S. if Washington fails to uphold its side of the deal.  (Majid Asgaripour/WANA)

The memorandum gives Iran major economic relief while leaving some of the most difficult nuclear questions for a final agreement to be negotiated throughout the next 60 days. Under the 14-point plan read by a senior U.S. official, Washington agreed to begin lifting its naval blockade, work with regional partners on a $300 billion reconstruction and development plan for Iran and terminate U.S., U.N. and other sanctions on an agreed schedule as part of a final deal. 

The memorandum also says all licenses, waivers and permissions needed for related financial transactions would be granted by the United States.

Advertisement

In return, Iran reaffirmed that it “shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons,” and the sides agreed to resolve the fate of Iran’s stockpiled enriched material under a future mechanism, with the minimum method being on-site down-blending under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision. 

The agreement defers many of the hardest questions — including how to wind down Iran’s nuclear program — until the 60-day negotiation period for a final deal.

But the Iranian figure at the center of the deal is not a diplomat known for moderation. 

Ghalibaf, a former Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander and longtime regime insider, has threatened American forces, vowed Trump would “pay the price” and built his career through loyalty to Iran’s security establishment.

The new warning underscored what experts say is the central risk of the agreement. Washington may be entering a deal with officials who can enforce Iran’s commitments but who have shown little sign of changing the regime’s long-term posture toward the U.S., Israel or the region. 

Advertisement

Ghalibaf, 64, is a product of Iran’s security establishment. He rose through the ranks of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps during the Iran-Iraq War, eventually becoming commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps air force. 

He later served as Iran’s national police chief, overseeing internal security forces responsible for suppressing protests, including the 1999 student uprising, alongside Qassem Soleimani.

After transitioning into politics, Ghalibaf attempted to run for president multiple times but failed. He instead built his career through loyalty to the system, serving as Tehran’s mayor for more than a decade before becoming speaker of parliament in 2020.

FAMILIES OF IRAN’S ELITE LIVE LAVISHLY ABROAD WHILE ORDINARY CITIZENS SUFFER AT HOME

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf looks on as parliament members wearing military uniforms chant in support of the IRGC in Tehran, Iran, on Feb. 1, 2026. (Hamed Malekpour/Islamic consultative assembly news agency/WANA/Handout via Reuters)

Advertisement

“Ghalibaf doesn’t have an independent line. His strength is that he is a ‘yes man,’” Beni Sabti, an Iran expert at the Institute for National Security Studies, previously told Fox News Digital. “If he is told to shake hands with special envoy Steve Witkoff, he will do it. If he is told to escalate, he will. It is not about moderation, it is about who gives the orders.”

“His name has also been linked to multiple corruption allegations, including misuse of oil revenues and sanctions evasion networks involving his family. His sons have reportedly been involved and are under sanctions,” Sabti said.

“There have also been public scandals involving family members traveling abroad and making luxury purchases, including widely circulated images of them arriving with numerous high-end Gucci suitcases.”

Behnam Ben Taleblu, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the image of Ghalibaf at a signing ceremony with a senior U.S. official would be a propaganda victory for the regime.

“There was a time when the Islamic Republic would have been terrified to be seen signing such a thing,” Ben Taleblu told Fox News Digital. “Postwar, this is a sign of the regime’s opportunism, and no one identifies that opportunism better than someone like Ghalibaf, who comes from the IRGC, who is a corrupt politician and is a wheeler and dealer.”

Advertisement

But Taleblu warned that Washington should not confuse Ghalibaf’s opportunism with moderation. 

“The mirage is the myth of Iranian military moderation and the myth that, with time, this regime will integrate and put aside all the things that have kept it on the sidelines for so long,” he said. “Transforming Iran via a deal — that is a huge lift.”

Ghalibaf’s wartime statements reflect the hardline posture inside Iran’s leadership. In remarks aired on Iranian television Jan. 12 and translated by MEMRI, he warned that U.S. forces would face catastrophic consequences if they confronted Iran.

“Come, so you can see what catastrophe befalls American bases, ships and forces,” he said, adding that American troops would be “burned by the fire of Iran’s defenders.”

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION UNVEILS SWEEPING TERMS OF PROPOSED IRAN AGREEMENT

Advertisement

A man lights a cigarette with fire from a burning picture of Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf as Israelis rally in support of nationwide protests in Iran in Holon, Israel, on Jan. 14, 2026. (Ammar Awad/Reuters)

More recently, he warned that “the blood of American soldiers is the personal responsibility of Trump” and vowed Iran would “settle accounts with the Americans and Israelis,” adding that “Trump and Netanyahu crossed our red lines and will pay the price.”

John Hannah, a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America and a former national security advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney, said Ghalibaf’s expected role reflects the reality of who holds power inside Iran. 

“If you’re going to sign an agreement with Iran, those are the forces in charge and calling the shots, presumably with the approval of the new supreme leader,” Hannah told Fox News Digital. “If the U.S. harbors hope that Iran will ever implement any of their obligations under the MOU, these are the people — odious as they are — capable of making it happen.”

But Hannah said the central question is whether Iran’s leadership sees compliance as useful or whether the agreement is simply a tactical pause.

Advertisement

“The big question is whether they see it in their interest to do so, or are they only buying time, rebuilding their power and preparing for the next round of conflict,” he said.

Ben Taleblu was even more blunt, warning that even a seemingly favorable agreement would not change the nature of the regime.

“Even if you’ve got the perfect deal, with this kind of regime, with this kind of mentality, they will escalate,” he said. “I thought we would have learned by now what the regime did after the JCPOA. It built a vast missile arsenal. It literally built an empire of terror proxies that took Israel years of blood, effort and money to dismantle, backed by American support.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf speaks during a press conference in Tehran, Iran, Nov. 27, 2024. (Majid Asgaripour/WANA via Reuters)

Advertisement

“If we engage in pay-to-play with these guys,” he added, “I’m sorry to sound the alarm bell like this — but something tells me this is bad either way.”

Responding to questions about the threats from Ghalibaf and IRGC Quds Force commander Esmail Qaani, the White House defended Trump’s approach and warned Iran would face consequences if it failed to reach a final deal.

“President Trump has a great track record of good deals for the American people, and the President has been clear about the consequences if Iran fails to make a good, final deal,” White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales told Fox News Digital. 

“What the president has achieved on the battlefield and at the negotiating table is nothing short of remarkable and will strengthen American security for many years to come.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

US-Iran talks postponed as Israel attacks Lebanon

Published

on

US-Iran talks postponed as Israel attacks Lebanon

Tehran holds back from talks to cement ceasefire due to ongoing Israeli attacks on southern Lebanon.

Planned talks in Switzerland between the United States and Iran to discuss the technical terms of their ceasefire deal have been postponed.

The Swiss Foreign Ministry confirmed early on Friday that the talks, which were scheduled to take place in Burgenstock, would now not go ahead.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

Reports suggest that Iran has delayed sending its delegation to discuss the technical issues linked to the ceasefire deal – digitally signed by the two countries on Wednesday – due to Israel’s ongoing military campaign in Lebanon.

Advertisement

Israeli strikes overnight and into Friday have reportedly killed at least 16 people in southern Lebanon, with Iran-linked Hezbollah reporting intense fighting.

Talks postponed

A ceremony followed by talks was expected to be held at the Burgenstock Resort in Stansstad, near Lucerne in central Switzerland.

It is owned by Katara Hospitality, part of Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund, which helped mediate peace in the conflict.

On Friday, in a message to media outlet AFP, the Swiss foreign ministry said: “The planned talks between the US, Iran, Qatar and Pakistan have been postponed”.

“Switzerland remains ready to facilitate these talks. The relevant preparatory work at Burgenstock is continuing,” it added, without providing a new date for the talks.

Advertisement

The announcement followed a report from media outlet Al-Mayadeen that Iran was delaying sending its delegation to Switzerland over Israel’s ongoing military campaign in Lebanon.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Thursday that Israel’s military will stay in a “security zone” of southern Lebanon as long as “Israel’s security needs require it.”

Israel and Hezbollah are not parties to the agreement, but Iran has insisted Israel must withdraw from the large swath of southern Lebanon it is occupying.

Logistics have never been ‘simple or predictable’

The US push to quickly begin high-stakes talks with Iran hit a snag just two days after the signing of a 14-point memorandum of understanding with the US that sets out a framework for talks during a 60-day negotiation period.

Vice President JD Vance had been prepared to make an overnight flight to meet with his Iranian counterparts at the mountainside resort in the tiny Swiss village of Obburgen.

Advertisement

His staff and a small pack of journalists had even gathered at Joint Base Andrews outside Washington in anticipation of the trip.

Meanwhile, dozens of White House officials, advance staffers and more media gathered in Switzerland to prepare for Vance’s anticipated arrival.

But then, abruptly on Thursday evening, the trip was called off.

The White House issued a statement explaining Vance – who has been tapped by President Donald Trump to lead the negotiations – and his delegation were prepared for talks, but they were unable to finalise plans and the vice president would remain in Washington.

“The logistics of these negotiations have never been simple or predictable,” the statement noted.

Advertisement

Also on Thursday, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif cancelled his trip to Switzerland, his spokesperson told AFP.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending