French President Emmanuel Macron and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez have issued a blistering rebuke against deportation camps outside the European Union, setting their countries on a collision course with a growing political majority.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

During a summit on Friday, 19 leaders across the bloc signed a joint declaration calling to make “full use” of a new European law that enables the construction of so-called return hubs to host migrants whose asylum applications have been denied.

The coalition, led by Denmark and Italy, two fierce advocates of outsourcing, wants to “move forward with solutions based in third countries as soon as possible”.

But for Macron and Sánchez, this path runs counter to European values and risks squandering financial resources and undercutting relations with neighbouring Africa.

“I am not sure that this is our Europe. I don’t know if these are the fundamental principles on which our Europe was built,” Macron said at the end of the summit on Friday.

“And I don’t think it’s effective, either. The proof is that I have not seen anyone make it work so far,” he went on, underscoring his strong dissatisfaction. (Italy has set up migration centres on Albanian soil but has fallen short of expected targets.)

“I have a lot of respect for anyone who wants to do it. I disagree, both pragmatically and in principle. I think it has nothing to do with European politics.”

Macron said his country was in favour of tougher laws to curb irregular arrivals but drew a red line on the physical transfer of migrants to faraway countries where they have never set foot. That possibility, long considered taboo, is allowed under a revamped Return Regulation described as the “strictest-ever” migration law.

“There is a question, in fact, around these famous return hubs in third countries. France does not support this policy. We are in favour of a more effective return policy. But first of all, I have never seen a return hub in a third country operate,” Macron went on.

“I invite you to consider what it is (in practice): this means that people who do not want to return to their country of origin or who cannot get back to their country of origin will be pushed into a third country, which will accept them in return for money.”

Macron mocked the jargonistic term “innovative solutions” that proponents of migration offshoring often use in their public communication and challenged the notion that host countries would respect human rights in exchange for financial incentives.

“I am a big supporter of innovation in my country,” he said, saying he would later attend the Vivatech festival in Paris. “But I am always very careful when talking about innovation in values and human rights. Allow me to have that reservation.”

Meanwhile, Sánchez, a vocal critic of the measures, said the deportation camps would be an “absolutely inefficient” and “worthless” response to irregular migration.

“It’s a mirage, if you will, that it will simply waste economic resources, and Europe doesn’t have many,” the Spaniard said after the summit in Brussels.

“Secondly, it sends a wrong message to those countries of origin and transit with which we should be collaborating, cooperating and showing empathy towards.”

Macron echoed Sánchez’s reputational concerns and insisted he would not allow EU funds to be used in any capacity to build the deportation camps, which are “neither effective nor do they correspond with our principles”.

“Sometimes, we hear one or the other (country) advocate policies with the African continent, so good luck defending our credibility on these continents by explaining that we will use the money for investments to build return hubs on their continents,” he said.

“What world do we live in?”

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.”

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.

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.

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. 

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

“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.”

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

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.

“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

“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.”