Albania’s Role in Europe’s Migration Overhaul: The Rise of Return Hubs and the ‘Albania Model’

EU Migration Overhaul: Albania Steps into the Spotlight

In the evolving landscape of European migration policy, few developments have garnered as much attention—or provoked as much debate—as the so-called ‘Albania model.’ With the European Union moving toward stricter, more coordinated migration controls, Albania finds itself at the heart of a bold experiment: hosting Italian-managed migrant return hubs on its territory. But what does this mean for Albania, for the migrants involved, and for the future of European asylum policy?

Return Hubs and the ‘Albania Model’: What Has Changed?

On December 10, 2025, the 27 EU member states approved a series of key measures aimed at overhauling the bloc’s migration and asylum framework. These changes, set to come into force in June, form part of the wider Pact on Asylum and Migration—a reform package years in the making. Central to these reforms is the legal green light for ‘return hubs’ not only within the EU but also in third countries, provided they meet agreed safety standards for migrants (InfoMigrants).

Italy’s agreement with Albania—previously a pilot—now becomes a template. Italian-run centers on Albanian soil are authorized to operate as repatriation facilities, not just as registration or processing hubs. The Italian Interior Minister, Matteo Piantedosi, hailed this as a significant diplomatic achievement, underscoring Italy’s leading role in shaping EU migration policy.

Solidarity, Responsibility, and a New Balance

But the reforms go deeper than logistics. The new system introduces a mandatory solidarity mechanism, with an initial quota set at 21,000 migrants, potentially increasing to 30,000 as the system matures. While some countries have signaled openness to relocating migrants, most are expected to opt for financial contributions as their form of solidarity. This flexibility, however, is balanced by stringent expectations: countries of first arrival, such as Italy and Greece, must register arrivals precisely, or risk losing access to EU aid.

The overhaul also introduces the concept of ‘responsibility offsets.’ Under this principle, destination countries can ask countries of first arrival to deduct the number of migrants present from their mandatory solidarity quota, as outlined in the Dublin Treaty. The aim is to strike a fair balance between frontline states and their northern neighbors—a delicate dance of responsibility and burden-sharing that has long vexed EU policymakers.

Safe Third Countries and the Shifting Grounds of Asylum

Arguably the most controversial element is the expanded use of the ‘safe third country’ concept. Under the revised rules, member states can now reject asylum applications without a full merit review if the applicant could have sought protection in a country deemed ‘safe.’ The bar for such a designation has been lowered: mere transit through a country can now qualify, even if the applicant has no prior ties there.

The Council also updated the list of ‘safe countries of origin,’ now including Bangladesh, Colombia, Egypt, India, Kosovo, Morocco, and Tunisia, among others. This move is intended to streamline returns and reduce the backlog in asylum processing. But critics warn it could expose vulnerable individuals to greater risk, especially if safety assessments are not rigorously enforced.

What Does This Mean for Albania?

For Albania, this new role is a double-edged sword. On one hand, it positions the country as a trusted partner to the EU, potentially strengthening its bid for EU membership and bringing in financial and diplomatic dividends. On the other, it raises complex questions about sovereignty, the rights of migrants, and the long-term social impact of hosting return centers on Albanian territory.

Albanian authorities must now ensure that any return hubs meet EU-mandated safety standards, a responsibility that comes with both logistical challenges and political scrutiny. Public opinion in Albania is divided; while some see this as an opportunity for greater integration with Europe, others worry about the strain on local resources and the potential for social tensions.

Broader Implications for European Migration Policy

The reforms are not without controversy. Human rights organizations have voiced concerns about the weakening of protections for asylum seekers and the risk of refoulement—returning individuals to countries where they may face harm. The relaxation of safety criteria for third countries, in particular, is viewed by some as a step backward for refugee rights.

Yet, supporters argue that these measures are necessary to restore public confidence in the EU’s ability to manage migration in an orderly, humane, and secure manner. By clarifying rules and sharing responsibility, the bloc hopes to reduce irregular arrivals, streamline returns, and ultimately foster a more sustainable asylum system.

Negotiations Ahead: The Road to Implementation

Although the Council has approved these measures, the reforms must still be negotiated with the European Parliament before coming into force. Details around quotas, funding, and operational standards remain to be finalized, and the delicate balance between solidarity and sovereignty will continue to shape the debate.

For now, the spotlight is on Albania—a small country at the crossroads of history and geopolitics, whose choices may well influence the future of European migration policy.

As the EU tightens its migration framework, Albania’s cooperation marks a significant shift: a practical experiment in externalized border management, but also a test of Europe’s commitment to rights and solidarity. The coming year will reveal whether the ‘Albania model’ becomes a blueprint for others—or a cautionary tale about the complexities of migration policy in an interconnected world.