On 18 December 2025, the Council of the European Union (EU) and the European Parliament tentatively agreed to create an EU-wide list of ‘safe countries of origin’ and ‘safe third countries’. Spain has responded and here the Spanish Evangelical Union explains our position on the new law.
It has become much more difficult to defend asylum claims in Europe.
Countries of origin included in the safe list include Bangladesh, Colombia, Egypt, India, Kosovo, Morocco, and Tunisia. As these countries are generally considered safe for their citizens, it will be much harder to defend asylum claims in Europe, leading to (possibly negative) faster processing of claims for migrants from these locations.
A safe third country is not the asylum seeker’s home country, but a transit country (or a country to which the asylum seeker may be sent) that the EU considers safe enough to reside or seek protection. These countries have not yet been identified.
This is part of the new Migration and Asylum Agreement, a major overhaul of the European Union’s migration rules aimed at more uniformly managing irregular migration, asylum procedures, border controls and returns across member states. It is scheduled to take effect in June 2026, and there is a possibility that large-scale deportations will occur.
The EU proposal and Spain’s response need to be understood in their own context.
Spain supports the agreement in principle, but is keen to implement aspects of the agreement more quickly as it faces pressure from asylum seekers on Spanish territory, particularly the Canary Islands. However, the EU proposal and Spain’s response must be understood in their respective contexts.
On the other hand, there are asymmetries within the EU in terms of pressure on migrant arrivals, with Spain, Italy and Greece differing significantly from Northern Europe. And southern countries are calling for the burden of these migrants to be redistributed across the EU.
On the other hand, polarization is becoming increasingly evident in Spain. Spain’s government is in the minority, and it is becoming increasingly impossible to reach consensus on national policy on issues such as education, health care, foreign policy, and immigration policy. The Spanish government’s proposals to the EU therefore lack the necessary internal consensus on such issues.
A clear balance must be found between the desire to welcome immigrants and the realistic possibility of doing so in a dignified manner.
As evangelicals, we understand that common policies based on broadly shared principles are essential in this area. We therefore believe that we must find a clear balance between the desire to welcome immigrants and the realistic possibility of welcoming them in a dignified manner.
The words of Exodus 12:49 are clear on this point. “The same law applies both to the natural-born and to the alien who dwells among you.” Welcomed immigrants must have the same rights as citizens.
In line with this, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights has been binding since 2007 (approved in 2000) and must be observed in terms of human rights and equal rights for third-country nationals. EU Regulations 883/2004, 987/2009 and 1231/2010 provide equal rights for third-country foreign nationals who have resided in the EU with permanent residence for five years (or less in certain cases).
At the same time, we are equally clear about the words of the previous verse (Exodus 12:48). “If any foreigner living among you wishes to celebrate the Passover of the Lord, he must cause all the male members of his household to be circumcised, so that he may partake of it as well as those born in the land. The uncircumcised male child must not eat of it.”
Translated into our current situation, immigrants have an obligation to fully integrate into our society by accepting democratic values and standards and respecting the dignity of every human being.
Resistance to integration is giving rise to xenophobic populism.
In this respect, there are clear differences between immigrant groups in the degree to which they respect a democratic culture based on European and Christian values. This issue must be resolved not only as a question of loyalty to the host country, but also because this resistance to integration has given rise to xenophobic populism, which is increasingly prevalent in European countries.
Given the current situation, it is clear that immigration is making up for the lack of replacement rate in Europe, but the replacement rate is very low not only because the birth rate is low but also because the number of voluntary abortions is very high. But it also seems clear that the flow of migrants to Europe will exceed what it can absorb.
Therefore, as evangelicals, we promote:
Cooperation for the development and promotion of human rights, religious and political freedoms in countries of origin. This will prevent tragedies at sea arising from the need for migration and the “European dream”. Forming a common policy in the sensitive area of immigration, especially preventing illegal immigration.
The issues discussed in recent press coverage arise precisely in the area of agreed immigration policy. Unfortunately, there are many relevant technical areas, such as the areas of freedom, security, justice and defence, but throughout the history of the EU, from the Treaties of Paris and Rome to the Treaties of Amsterdam and Lisbon, to the current Treaty on European Union and Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, no agreement could be reached between States.
There is no guarantee that the third country to which migrants end up will protect their human rights.
Italy has proposed a solution that seeks to reach an agreement, which we believe is a positive goal. The Spanish government is reluctant in the sense that there is no guarantee that the third country to which migrants will end up will protect their human rights.
This problem can be resolved by establishing strict mechanisms for monitoring and control by the EU to ensure such protection in its agreements with these third countries.
However, it is important that this response to illegal immigration is not only realistic and workable, but also consistent with the objectives pursued.
If the purpose is simply to get rid of the problem, we forget that we are talking about humans, and the implementation of the solution will not be humane. If the aim is to deter and prosecute illegal immigrants, but also to address the human drama behind them, the aforementioned supervisory instruments must make every effort to ensure respect for the human rights of illegal immigrants.
Finally, we must fully recognize that there is sometimes hidden tragedy in illegal immigration, and in some cases people at grave risk, such as Christians and political dissidents who are persecuted in their countries of origin (which may be considered “safe”) for their faith, are forcibly returned and exposed to persecution, imprisonment, torture, or the death penalty.
We must never forget that humans must be at the heart of any political endeavor.
On this issue, we evangelicals, like others, understand that even with agreed-upon and reasonable rules, we must never forget that humans must be at the center of any political endeavor.
Dr. Xes Manuel Suárez García is from Galicia (northern Spain). He is General Secretary of the Spanish Evangelical Union and a member of the Executive Committee of GBU España (IFES). He has written various books and articles on Christian faith and political engagement.
