Insiders express concern over ambiguity in EU funding for Egypt

A member of the European Parliament speaking to Mada Masr on condition of anonymity expressed concern over what they described as the “obscurity” surrounding the European Union’s new agreement with Egypt.

The agreement, signed March 17, upgraded relations between Egypt and the European Union to a “strategic partnership” and included a 7.4 billion euro financing package for Cairo, a huge step-up from the tens of millions Egypt has received from the EU to counter migration over recent years.

While the EU funding comes at the same time other international actors are committing billions of dollars in inflows to Egypt as a lifeline to snatch the country back from economic collapse, insiders said that — aside from the counter-migration imperative coming from Brussels — the EU’s plan for the funds isn’t totally clear.

As per the official wording, the funding entails 5 billion euros in concessional loans for the macroeconomy in the form of conditional disbursements, as well as a further 1.8 billion euros in investments. A further 600 million euros is forthcoming in grants, including 200 million euros specifically for migration-related issues.

An initial 1 billion euro tranche in emergency funding is due for payment this year, with the remaining total financial assistance of 4 billion euros contingent on approval by the European Parliament, according to a European official cited anonymously by Reuters.

But the draft by the EU Commission was only presented to the European Parliament for review at the end of December, two weeks before the holiday break, meaning that the timeframe for European Parliament members to examine it was limited, said the MEP.

The parliamentarian said that the terms were not adequately elucidated to the parliament and that "everything related to the deal is extremely obscure, and parliamentary oversight is weak."

Sources within the Emigration Ministry, meanwhile, said that the specifics of incoming funding for migration were not clear.

The MEP described the deal as being crafted in a manner that leaves it "open to interpretation" by both sides. On the Egyptian side, said the MEP, the funding could be seen more in the light of large-scale economic assistance from Europe. The EU, however, could view it primarily as a migration deal, as well as a means for European Parliament members to claim they are acting on migration before the European election cycle.

Unregulated migration to Europe increased over the course of 2023, with the highest percentage of arrivals coming from Egyptian, Bangladeshi or Pakistani nationality. Around 4,000 people died attempting the journey via the Mediterranean Sea over the same year.

Leslie Piquemal, the EU Advocacy Representative at the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies told Mada Masr that Egyptian diplomats have discussed with their European counterparts the question of increasing the grants that Egypt receives, ever since Europe granted Turkey 6 billion euros in funding to combat migration and support refugees living in the country in 2016. 

Egyptian diplomats say that Egypt also has a large number of migrants and refugees, and that it is appropriate for Egypt to receive the same funds as Turkey, said Piquemal.

Egyptian officials, including the president, have repeated in their statements to Europe that Egypt is home to around 9 million “guests” — foreign nationals who have fled their homes but are not officially registered as refugees with the United Nations.

Funding from the EU can also be thought of as combatting migration indirectly, said Piquemal. She noted that European Union employees sometimes say that EU grants support the economy and social services in areas from which people migrate as much as they directly combat undocumented departures from Egypt’s shores to Europe or to Libya; the main departure point for boat journeys.

In the absence of clarity around the destination of the funding, some have flagged concerns over how the financing to counter irregular migration will be used.

Given infractions of the 1951 Refugee Convention, there are concerns within the European Parliament regarding the efficacy of similar funding, said the MEP, specifically pointing to the debate about funds allocated to Greece.

Both Mauritania and Tunisia have also recently been allocated substantial financing packages from the EU for combatting unregulated migration, with the European Parliament agreeing on a resolution condemning the EU Commission for sidestepping normal oversight procedures to fast-track funding for Tunisia.

Twenty European and Egyptian organizations have also signed an open letter to European officials to express concerns over the newly increased funding for Egypt, citing what they called the country’s “appalling human rights record, including in areas, such as border control and migration management, which the deal covers.”

Piquemal, whose organization is a signatory to the letter, told Mada Masr that in her conversations with European Union staffers over the years, EU concern about incoming migration tends to trump thinking about how its funds are spent.

"Their response has been that, ‘there are many Egyptian migrants and refugees leaving Egypt, and we are unable to accommodate those numbers. We must close this route.’” Piquemal said. “I consider this discourse unethical."

Officials in Europe have flagged the same ambiguity. EU Ombudsman Emily O’Reilly said, “in relation to the fundamental rights issues regarding the various deals being done, well, tell us concretely what you’re doing,” speaking in a news conference, addressing the EU Commission.

EuroMed Rights President Wadih al-Asmar told Mada Masr that “grants cannot be separated from human rights. We are not talking about cargo, we are talking about a human being who has reasons for migration.”

“Assistance provided cannot be unconditional. It must have conditions to uphold human rights in countries in the southern Mediterranean,” he continued.