tag

Europe has introduced its most significant overhaul of external border control in decades. It has also introduced a new point of friction into the passenger journey at precisely the moment the system faces its first real stress test.The Entry/Exit System, known as EES, became fully operational across the Schengen area on April 10. Its objective is clear. Replace manual passport stamping with a centralised digital system that records biometric data for non-EU travellers, tracks entries and exits, and identifies overstays with far greater accuracy. British, American and Gulf passengers arriving into Europe now provide fingerprints, a facial image and passport details at the border. In policy terms, the logic is sound. In operational terms, the execution is already under strain.Queues of several hours have been reported within days of full implementation. These are not isolated disruptions linked to a single airport or a temporary systems issue. They reflect a structural mismatch between how the system is designed to function and how airports actually operate at scale.The warning signs were visible well before April. EES was introduced in phases, gradually expanding coverage from a small proportion of travellers to full deployment. At each stage, there were indications that processing times were longer than expected and that the supporting infrastructure was not consistently reliable. Airports such as Lisbon experienced sufficient disruption to suspend use of the system temporarily, supported by additional police staffing to manage queues. That response alone should have been enough to signal that the system was not yet ready for universal application.What has happened since full implementation is predictable. Border processing now includes biometric capture for every eligible passenger. That adds time to each individual transaction. The European Commission has pointed to an average processing time of around 70 seconds per passenger. The figure is technically correct and operationally misleading. Airports do not function on averages. They function on peaks.When multiple long-haul aircraft arrive within a narrow window, several hundred passengers can reach immigration at the same time. A marginal increase in processing time per passenger quickly compounds into significant queues. Add even a small disruption, such as a non-functioning kiosk or a shortage of border officers, and the system slows further. Once a queue begins to build, it does not dissipate quickly. It feeds into itself.This dynamic is well understood within the industry. Airport infrastructure is built around waves of arrivals and departures, particularly at major hubs. Morning transatlantic arrivals, evening long-haul banks, and high-density short-haul peaks create predictable surges in passenger flow. Any system that adds friction at the border must be designed to handle those surges, not theoretical averages spread across a day.The EES system, in its current state, struggles to do that. Airlines and airport operators had raised concerns months before full rollout. Industry bodies including Airports Council International Europe, Airlines for Europe and the International Air Transport Association identified three core risks: Insufficient border staffing, unresolved technology issues, and the absence of a widely available pre-registration tool that would allow passengers to complete part of the process before arriving at the airport.Those concerns remain valid. Staffing levels at many border checkpoints are tight, even during normal operations. The addition of biometric processing increases the workload at each position. Technology reliability has improved compared with early trials, yet failures continue to occur, particularly at automated kiosks. The pre-registration application, designed to reduce pressure by shifting part of the process away from the airport, remains limited in its availability. As a result, the entire burden falls on the border itself.The implications are already visible. Passengers are missing flights because they cannot clear immigration in time, airlines are adjusting boarding processes to account for uncertainty at outbound passport control, and airports are managing queues that extend far beyond the physical space originally designed for border processing.The impact is not evenly distributed. Airports with a high proportion of non-EU arrivals are under greater pressure, particularly those handling long-haul traffic from North America, the Gulf and Asia. These passengers must all pass through EES processing, and they often arrive in concentrated waves. For those airports, the system introduces a new constraint on throughput at precisely the busiest points in the day.There is also a reputational dimension. Passengers do not distinguish between an airport operator, a national border authority or an EU-managed system. The experience is interpreted as a single journey. Long queues at immigration become an airport problem in the eyes of the traveller, regardless of where responsibility sits. That matters for hubs that have invested heavily in efficiency and service as part of their competitive positioning.The timing compounds the challenge. Europe is approaching the peak summer travel period, when passenger volumes increase significantly across all major hubs. July and August will bring sustained pressure rather than isolated peaks. The system has yet to demonstrate that it can operate smoothly under those conditions.At the same time, the wider aviation environment is already complex. Airlines are managing higher operating costs, network adjustments linked to geopolitical developments, and continued supply constraints on aircraft deliveries. Passenger demand remains strong, yet expectations around reliability and ease of travel have risen. Border friction sits directly within that expectation.None of this suggests that EES is an unnecessary policy. The objective of accurately tracking entries and exits, identifying overstays and strengthening external border security is legitimate. The system has already processed tens of millions of crossings and contributed to enforcement outcomes that were not previously possible at scale. The issue is not the concept. It is the timing and the readiness of the infrastructure supporting it.A more flexible approach to implementation would reflect operational reality. Allowing temporary suspensions or scaled-back processing during peak periods would provide immediate relief while technical and staffing issues are addressed. Accelerating the rollout of pre-registration tools would shift part of the process away from the border itself, reducing pressure where it is most acute. Investment in staffing and equipment reliability is equally essential.The author is an aviation analyst. X handle: @AlexInAir. 

The European Commission proposed Wednesday an unprecedented use of frozen Russian assets or international borrowing to raise €90bn ($105bn) for Ukraine to cover its struggling military and basic services against Russia's war.The European Union's executive body has declared it favours a "reparations loan" using Russian state assets immobilised in the EU due to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. But Belgium, which holds most of the assets, has voiced a range of concerns that it said had not been satisfactorily addressed by the proposals."We are proposing to cover two-thirds of Ukraine’s financing needs for the next two years. That’s €90bn euros. The remainder would be for international partners to cover," Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told reporters."Since pressure is the only language the Kremlin responds to, we can also dial it up," she said. "We have to increase the costs of war for (Russian President Vladimir) Putin's aggression and today's proposal gives us the means to do this."She said the proposal to EU member states had taken into account almost all the concerns raised by Belgium, whose Brussels-based financial institution Euroclear is the main holder of the assets.The proposal would now also cover other financial institutions in the EU that hold Russian assets, von der Leyen said. EU officials said France, Germany, Sweden and Cyprus also held such assets.Russia has warned the EU and Belgium against using its assets, which it says would be an act of theft. The Commission says the scheme does not amount to confiscation as the money would be in the form of a loan — although Ukraine would only have to redeem it if Russia pays reparations.The complexities around the scheme increased after a US-backed 28-point plan to end the war in Ukraine proposed that some of the assets be used in a joint American-Russian investment vehicle.But von der Leyen said she had informed US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent of her plan to move forward with the reparations loan and it had been "positively received".Economy Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis said the EU was also seeking to persuade other international partners to provide support in the first quarter of next year as the EU money would probably not be available until the second quarter.The Commission said the EU could proceed with the scheme if 15 out of 27 member countries, representing at least 65% of the bloc's population, voted in favour.EU officials said this would also apply to ensure Russia's sanctioned assets remain immobilised, an essential part of the reparations loans, under EU law allowing financial assistance in instances of "severe difficulties". Sanctions roll-overs normally require unanimity.The other option — borrowing on international markets using the EU budget — would also normally require unanimity among EU countries — a potentially difficult hurdle as Hungary's Russia-friendly government has opposed previous funding for Ukraine.European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde told a European Parliament hearing that using a reparations loan would be a stretch from a legal and financial standpoint though it would "hopefully" respect international law and financial stability.Hours earlier, before the Commission's legal proposals were presented, Belgian Foreign Minister Maxime Prevot declared that they fell short of Belgium's requirements."We have the frustrating feeling of not having been heard. Our concerns are being downplayed," Prevot told reporters at a meeting of Nato foreign ministers in Brussels."The texts the Commission will table today do not address our concerns in a satisfactory manner."The issue is likely to come to a head at an EU leaders summit on December 18, when the Commission said it hoped to clinch a firm commitment by member states.Belgium has demanded that other EU countries guarantee they will cover all legal costs arising from any Russian lawsuits against the scheme. It also wants them to guarantee they would help provide money quickly to pay Russia back if a court ever ruled Moscow must be refunded.Thirdly, it has demanded that other countries holding Russian frozen assets also make those funds available to Ukraine. 

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen welcomed on Tuesday US President Donald Trump's peace proposal, which aims to end the nearly two-year-old war in Gaza. "I welcome US President Donald Trump's commitment to end the war in Gaza and encourage all parties to now seize this opportunity. The EU stands ready to contribute," she said on X platform. "Hostilities should end with provision of immediate humanitarian relief to the population in Gaza and with all hostages released immediately," she added. The US President has announced a plan to end the war in the Gaza Strip through a comprehensive agreement that guarantees the unimpeded delivery of adequate humanitarian aid to the Strip, prevents the displacement of Palestinians, releases hostages, establishes a security mechanism that guarantees the security of all parties, in addition to a full Israeli withdrawal, the reconstruction of Gaza, and the establishment of a path to a just peace based on the two-state solution. This would see Gaza fully reunited with the West Bank in a Palestinian state in accordance with international law, as a key to achieving regional stability and security.

The European Commission on Wednesday proposed suspending a trade arrangement affecting about 5.8 billion euros ($6.87 billion) of Israeli exports due to the Gaza war, although the measure does not currently have enough support among EU nations to pass.EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas also proposed a package of sanctions on two Israeli ministers, as well as "violent" Israeli settlers and 10 senior members of Hamas.The two ministers are far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, an EU official said.Israel's nearly two-year offensive in Gaza and the worsening humanitarian situation has increased political pressure on European leaders to take action.The European Union is Israel's biggest trading partner, with trade in goods between the two amounting to 42.6 billion euros last year, according to the EU.If the free-trade arrangement is suspended, Israel would face duties at the same level as other countries without a trade accord with the bloc.In Israel's case, that would affect exports worth approximately 5.8 billion euros, resulting in an estimated 227 million euros a year in duties, a senior Commission official told reporters.Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said on X that the European proposals are "morally and politically distorted, and it is to be hoped that they will not be adopted".The suspension of free-trade arrangements, first floated by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week, would require the support of a qualified majority of EU governments - 15 out of 27 EU members representing 65% of the EU population.EU diplomats told Reuters that it is unlikely that the proposal would get the necessary support, with much depending on Germany, which has so far been reluctant to impose EU penalties on Israel.A German government spokesperson said on Wednesday it has not yet formed a final view on the EU proposals and Germany wants to keep the channels of communication with Israel open.Diplomats say the proposed measures against the Israeli ministers are also unlikely to pass as they require unanimous support from EU members.Kallas said that although public opinion has been shifting due to suffering in Gaza, she believes "the political lines are very much in the place where they have been so far".But the proposals mark a political shift in the EU's relationship with Israel.The Commission is also putting its bilateral support for Israel on hold, without affecting work with Israeli civil society and Yad Vashem, Israel's main Holocaust memorial centre.

EU chief Ursula von der Leyen said Wednesday she would push to sanction "extremist" Israeli ministers and curb trade ties over Gaza, as she warned famine could not be used as a "weapon of war".Addressing the European Parliament, von der Leyen lamented that divisions among member states were holding back a European response and said the European Commission she leads "will do all that it can on its own"."What is happening in Gaza has shaken the conscience of the world. People killed while begging for food. Mothers holding lifeless babies. These images are simply catastrophic," von der Leyen said."For the sake of the children, for the sake of humanity -- this must stop."The German politician, 66, said the commission would put its bilateral support to Israel on hold, stopping all payments, but without affecting work with civil society groups and Israel's Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial.The measure is to affect future allocations amounting to about six million euros ($7 million) a year and the disbursement of about 14 million euros for ongoing institutional cooperation projects, the commission said.The European Union's executive will propose sanctions on "extremist ministers" -- whose actions and words "incite violence" -- and "violent settlers".And it will push for a partial suspension of an association agreement with Israel on trade-related matters.But such measures will need approval by the bloc's 27 member states, which have been deeply divided on how to respond to Israel's actions in Gaza."I am aware it will be difficult to find majorities," von der Leyen conceded."And I know that any action will be too much for some. Too little for others. But we must all take our own responsibilities".The United Nations declared famine last month in parts of Gaza, warning that 500,000 people face "catastrophic" conditions.