Monday, September 21, 2026

'It's been resolved': Trump's ambassador to Belgium trumpets US-Greenland deal


Euronews
By Angela Skujins
Published on

Donald Trump's envoy to Belgium Bill White has hailed an agreement between Washington, Nuuk and Copenhagen over Greenland's security status, seemingly ending the transatlantic row over the Danish territory.

"It's been resolved," US Ambassador to Belgium Bill White told Euronews' flagship current affairs news programme Europe Today, following a weekend deal between the US, Denmark and Greenland over security on Greenland.

"I told everybody to relax, take a deep breath. It will all be fine. And yesterday, it was announced that it's all fine," he said on Monday.

The agreement, which eases tensions between Europe and the US over President Donald Trump's repeated threats to claim the territory, has been hailed by leaders on both sides of the Atlantic. However, details remain scant.

Trump said in a post on his Truth Social media platform that the deal gives his country "permanent control over security."

It also means that no US "adversary" can maintain a military base on the Arctic island, he added, or make "sensitive investments in Greenland without our express written approval."

Since his return to the White House in January 2025, Trump has claimed that seizing Greenland is essential for his country's "national security" and that if Washington did not act, then China or Russia would do so.

Leaders across the European Union have bridled over his rhetoric, with many saying that his Greenland threats crossed a line. "I would say it's like a marriage," White said of Trump's relationship with the bloc. "Sometimes you have to do a little tough love, and tough love is actually very effective."

On Sunday, while en route to the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), where the deal is expected to be finalised, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said she was looking forward to the "prospect of a good agreement" for Greenland, Denmark and the US.

Greenland's Premier Jens-Frederik Nielsen welcomed the deal, saying it was "to the benefit of us all" and that it would "ensure and strengthen" security on the island.

"We must take good care of Greenland, stand together around what matters most, and remain firm that we must always be treated with respect," he said.

The purported agreement comes after European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen visited Greenland in early September and unveiled a €200 million investment package that many interpreted as an attempt to counter pressure from Washington. She also directly referenced the territory in her State of the Union address last week, noting that the EU "stood up for Greenland when it was threatened."

The EU is currently updating its Arctic Strategy as it bids to address the growing security and defence concerns of the resource-rich region, as well as oil and gas drilling. The new, non-binding policy document is set to be published next month.

 

Brussels to keep ban on Arctic oil and gas drilling despite Norwegian pressure

Norway rejected in March 2011 oil drilling in ecologically sensitive waters just above the Arctic circle, partly because of worries over a disaster like the Gulf of Mexico.
Copyright AP Photo / Håkon Mosvold

By Marta Pacheco
Published on

Euronews has learned that the European Commission will maintain its ban on new oil and gas drilling in the Arctic, ahead of the 20 October announcement of its revamped Northern Neighbourhood strategy.

A ban on new oil and gas drilling in the Arctic will remain the European Commission’s official position in a revised strategy Brussels is due to unveil, a Commission spokesperson told Euronews, despite fierce pressure from oil-rich Norway to drop the ban.

The revised version of the EU’s 2021 Arctic strategy will be announced on 20 October, as the region gains increasing strategic importance for the bloc’s defence and climate ambitions.

“Moving forward, our approach on the moratorium will remain unchanged: our policies have objectives to address climate change and environmental degradation and support sustainable economic development,” the Commission spokesperson said.

For the Commission, new Arctic fossil fuel development is incompatible with its climate goals. Maintaining the moratorium underscores Brussels’ determination to uphold that position, despite calls from the International Energy Agency to reconsider it and pressure from Norway, a key energy supplier and ally, as the bloc faces an energy crunch.

In 2021, Germany, Sweden and Finland broadly backed the Commission’s position that new oil and gas should “remain in the ground”. Denmark, meanwhile, had to strike a delicate balance between supporting the EU’s green ambitions and its limited ability to impose them on Greenland, its autonomous territory, which controls vast mineral resources, including significant estimated undiscovered oil and gas reserves.

The Commission initially proposed a multilateral legal obligation to ban new oil and gas exploration in the Arctic and surrounding regions — a proposal backed by Germany. But the strategy ultimately remained a non-binding political commitment.

Asked whether the revised Arctic strategy would remain a symbolic political statement, the Commission said the “process is ongoing”. The ban is nevertheless expected to remain non-binding, potentially avoiding a direct clash with Norway as the EU faces concerns over energy supplies.

EU collides with Norway

Norway has described gas exploration in the Arctic as insurance for the EU as the bloc grapples with rising energy prices. Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron is calling a G7 meeting on energy, where a second release of emergency oil stocks could be discussed.

Pressuring the EU to reconsider its position, Norwegian Energy Minister Terje Aasland recently said that “continued activity in the Barents Sea serves both Norwegian and European interests”, citing disruption to global energy markets following the war in the Middle East. He also said Norway would continue drilling in the Arctic regardless of the EU’s position.

The issue is particularly sensitive for Brussels because Norway is deeply embedded in the EU’s energy security architecture. Recent shocks, including a damaged pipeline in Saudi Arabia, have highlighted how quickly Europe can be exposed when supplies from other producing regions are disrupted.

With Russian pipeline gas largely pushed out of the European market, Norway has become the EU’s largest LNG supplier, accounting for 54.4% of total EU imports between January and June, up from 52.1% in 2025, according to EU data.

Environmental activists, however, argue that Norwegian Arctic gas accounts for just 1.4% of EU gas imports and is unlikely to make a significant difference to near-term energy security. Gas from the New Barents Sea would not come online until 2045, too late to address the EU’s immediate needs, according to a new WWF-Norway analysis.

“Significant new Arctic supplies would arrive as EU gas demand is expected to fall sharply,” WWF-Norway said in a statement. It cited analysis suggesting EU fossil gas demand could fall from around 329 billion cubic meters (bcm) in 2024 to approximately 85 bcm in 2040 under a pathway aligned with a 90% reduction in emissions.

The report does not challenge existing Norwegian production or the country’s role as a reliable energy supplier. Instead, it argues that clean power, electrification and energy efficiency could reduce Europe’s reliance on imported fossil fuels faster than new Arctic oil and gas projects.

Norway’s progress on clean power and electrification could provide some common ground with Brussels. Battery electric vehicles account for roughly 95% to 99% of new passenger car sales in the country.

Paal Frisvold, coordinator of the NGO Alliance to Preserve the Moratorium on Oil Drilling in the Arctic, called the EU’s decision to maintain the ban an “important victory” for the climate and said it could help prevent growing rivalry in the High North.

“It sends an important signal to Norway and the petroleum sector of the EU’s firm commitment to accelerating the transition to a competitive and emission-free Europe in line with the Paris Agreement, with affordable domestic energy that eliminates dependency on imported expensive fossil fuels to the detriment of European households and industry,” Frisvold told Euronews.

Arctic summit

The EU’s ban on new Arctic oil and gas exploration was likely discussed by leaders at the Arctic Summit hosted by Finland on 13 and 14 September, which was attended by Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre.

Eleven heads of state and government — from Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, France, Greece, the Netherlands, Poland and Sweden — attended the event in Rovaniemi to discuss the Arctic’s “strategic importance”.

They were joined by European Council President António Costa, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas and International Partnerships Commissioner Jozef Síkela.

Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo said Europe should take a “comprehensive approach” to Arctic security, including energy. He also pointed to intensifying competition between major powers in the region, citing growing activity and interest from China, Russia and the United States.

It remains unclear whether the deal struck between Washington, Denmark and Greenland on 18 September covers an oil exploration project in eastern Greenland’s Jameson Land Basin, an area previously eyed by the Donald Trump administration.

Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo hailed the Arctic Summit as a “very productive” high-level discussion that “goes beyond military security”.

“This is about economic security, critical minerals, energy, infrastructure and logistics, trade routes, security of supply, climate change and sustainable development,” Orpo said.

A source close to EU Arctic policy talks told Euronews that references to energy at the summit “could refer to other potential energy sources in the region, even solar, during long periods”.

The Commission announced €200 million in investments for Greenland on 7 September, including funding for “low-carbon energy production, storage and technologies suitable for the Arctic and system resilience”.

 

Dirty air is killing Europeans and costing trillions. These cities prove change is possible


By Denis Loktev
Published on

From London's ULEZ to Sofia's clean air zone, European cities are proving that cleaner air is achievable – but there's still much work to do.

Air pollution caused almost eight million deaths worldwide in 2023, according to Breathe Cities, a global initiative that tackles urban air pollution. The health impact is estimated to cost €7.12 trillion a year, around six per cent of global GDP.

"Pollution remains invisible for most people," Dr María Neira, former director of environment, climate change and health at the World Health Organization, tells Euronews Earth. She says pollutant particles reach "any organ" in the body, including the brain, contributing to cognitive decline and diseases such as Parkinson's, Alzheimer's and dementia.

Olympic runner Paula Radcliffe, diagnosed with exercise-induced asthma at 14, has felt the effects herself. Running in a polluted Beijing, she felt "headaches, nausea" and impaired vision, she tells Euronews Earth. She adds that dirty air also affects children's brain development and school performance.

London credits its Ultra Low Emission Zone with reducing air quality-related deaths by 40% since 2019 Euronews

Cities take action against air pollution

Breathe Cities now works with 16 cities worldwide to expand access to air quality data and support clean air policies.

London has cut deaths linked to toxic air by around 40 per cent since introducing its Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) and other clean air measures, according to an independent study by Imperial College London.

In Sofia, Bulgaria, traffic and wood-burning heating remain the two biggest sources of pollution. "By 2023, we were estimated to be one of the cities with the most deaths attributable to air pollution," Dr Kostadin Kostadinov of the Medical University of Plovdiv tells Euronews Earth.

Following a class action lawsuit brought by environmental groups and residents, Sofia introduced a low emission zone restricting traffic and upgrading domestic heating. "There is already evidence that it's bringing down pollution," Ivaylo Hlebarov, air quality consultant to Sofia Municipality, tells Euronews Earth.

But the zone runs for only three months a year. "It's a political decision," Hlebarov says, noting that traffic-related nitrogen dioxide pollution shows little seasonal variation. "This zone should become... a whole year round" measure, he adds.

Bulgaria has some of Europe's highest rates of cardiovascular disease, stroke and cancer – conditions Kostadinov says are strongly linked to air pollution, even though local research remains limited.

One of Europe's most polluted cities, Sofia works on improving its air quality Getty Images

What comes next for Europe's air pollution crisis?

Political will, rather than technology, is now the main obstacle, according to Neira, who points to resistance from fossil fuel and transport industries as cities push for renewable energy and sustainable mobility. Climate change is expected to make the problem harder to solve.

Breathe Cities is now preparing a second phase of its work, extending support to more communities as it builds on the reductions already achieved in places such as London, Sofia and other participating cities.

 

Climate Week warns of challenges in delivering the energy transition

Solar park in the United States: the energy transition is one of today's major challenges
Copyright Joshua A. Bickel/AP

By Ricardo Figueira
Published on

The event coincides with the United Nations General Assembly and is organised by the NGO Climate Group, which aims to achieve net-zero carbon emissions worldwide by 2050.

A Climate Week (source in Portuguese) began in New York this Sunday, with a series of events across the city, and runs until the 27th. Over the coming days, business and political leaders from around the world will discuss solutions for a more sustainable society with lower carbon emissions.

The event is an initiative of the non-governmental organisation Climate Group (source in Portuguese), organised in coordination with the United Nations General Assembly, which takes place at the same time in the same city.

The first day, Monday, features contributions from the Prime Minister of Australia, Anthony Albanese, the UK foreign secretary, Ed Milliband, and the Icelandic prime minister Kristún Frostadóttir.

This is the largest event in the world dedicated to climate change. It includes more than a thousand events at various locations in New York, bringing together on average more than one hundred thousand people.

This year's debates will focus on three aspects:

Energy and the changes taking place in this field,

The impact those changes are having,

The joint action that is needed.

This series of debates comes at a time when the impact of climate change is highly visible, with tragedies such as the one that recently hit Nepal and the heatwaves that have been battering many parts of the world in recent weeks.

Heatwaves have been recurring in recent weeks
Heatwaves have been recurring in recent weeks Ahn Young-joon/AP

Climate Group has been in existence for around 20 years and aims to help create a world with zero carbon emissions by 2050.

According to the description Climate Group gives on the event website, "the context is changing rapidly. Energy systems are being redesigned, supply chains are under pressure and demand for electricity is rising, driven by electrification, Artificial Intelligence (AI) and digital infrastructure. At the same time, the transition is opening up new sources of long-term growth, investment and competitiveness."

The organisers also say that "the current challenge is not ambition but implementation". "Progress is being held back by outdated regulation, infrastructure constraints and misaligned markets. The priority is to remove these barriers and deliver change quickly and at scale. Climate Week exists to accelerate that progress," they add.

This year's conference is taking place against a backdrop of the rapid expansion of AI and the revolution that implies, but also of the strongly climate-sceptic actions and policies pursued by the Trump administration.

The last global climate summit, COP30, held in Belém do Pará, Brazil, ultimately delivered results that fell short of expectations. While a plan was agreed to help the countries most affected by the climate crisis, no precise timetable was set for the phase-out of fossil fuels.

 

Singer Damon Albarn speaks out as Gorillaz kick off US tour: 'Don’t ever be neutral'

Damon Albarn holds up Palestinian flag as Gorillaz kick off US tour: “Don’t ever be neutral”
Copyright AP Photo

By David Mouriquand
Published on

Gorillaz frontman Damon Albarn's action and words come at a time when discussion continues regarding artists' ability to freely express their thoughts about Palestine. His words also resonate as the neutrality of figures like Ed Sheeran has drawn widespread condemnation.

Gorillaz have kicked off their 2026 US tour and the band's frontman, Damon Albarn, urged the crowds not to be "neutral" in the face of atrocities in Gaza.

During the concert at Orlando's Kia Center this weekend, Albarn took a Palestinian flag from an audience member, lifted it above his head and told the crowd: “Don’t forget this. Ever. Stand your position. Don’t ever be neutral.”

While not the first artist to be outspoken on stage about the atrocities in the Middle East, as many artists like Massive Attack, Kneecap, Fontaines D.C., Patti Smith and more have expressed solidarity with the plight of the Palestinian people, Albarn's words resonate in the wake of the Ed Sheeran controversy.

Heated discussion continues regarding artists' ability to freely express their thoughts about Palestine following Macklemore's "Free Palestine" speech during Sheeran's tour and the rapper's subsequent removal from the line-up.

Gilette Stadium owner Robert Kraft stated that he found Macklemore’s speech “deeply offensive and hurtful to the Jewish community”, resulting in his dismissal - despite Macklemore saying during his speech: "To all of my Jewish brothers and sisters: criticism of Israel, criticism of apartheid, being against genocide in no way is a criticism of you. My message is for peace; love for all human beings to be treated with dignity, respect, and equality."

Sheeran, who returned to the stage this weekend without his supporting acts or backing band, who all quit in solidarity with Macklemore, addressed the situation and admitted to making "mistakes". He also revealed that the controversy left him questioning whether he wanted “to be an artist at all”.

“I don’t want to disappoint fans, and I’ve never wanted to be an activist musician, but this has put me in the middle of an important and passionate argument about freedom of speech and the most complex political issue on the planet,” he said. "The last week of my life was been one of the worst weeks… Tonight has been honestly the best show of my life. (...) In this situations you really find out who your friends are… People I’ve knew from years ago are backing away."

His comments have garnered further criticism, as many online saw it as Sheeran making the controversy about himself rather than the devastating loss of lives.

Several artists have backed Macklemore and slammed Sheeran. Massive Attack said that "neutrality in the face of the slaughter of more than 20,000 children can never be neutrality", while ex-Pink Floyd Roger Waters called Sheeran a "little prick".

As for Albarn, this is far from the first time the artist has spoken out about Palestian rights.

Speaking to Channel 4 News last year, he said: “I think it’s about not denying the legitimacy of Palestine, not denying the historical presence of Palestinians and recognising the genocide that is taking place there. (...) It’s impossible to watch. It just feels so horrendously helpless and we cannot deny the Palestinians their existence, which is what’s going on at the moment. It’s just wrong. Palestinians belong there and you can’t just kick them out. It’s not acceptable.”

Damon Albarn of Gorillaz performs at the Shaky Knees Music Festival - Sunday 20 September 2026
Damon Albarn of Gorillaz performs at the Shaky Knees Music Festival - Sunday 20 September 2026 AP Photo

Hamas launched an attack on Israel on 7 October 2023. The Gaza health ministry has reported more than 73,000 deaths in the last three years of Israeli bombardment. Organisations including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the United Nations have described Israel's actions as "genocide".

A report published in June by a UN independent commission found that "Israeli authorities and security forces have deliberately targeted Palestinian children, resulting in genocide and atrocity crimes in the Gaza Strip and war crimes in the West Bank."

A previous report last September by a United Nations-appointed Commission of Inquiry found that Israel had committed genocide and claimed that these acts were incited by senior Israeli officials, including prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Israel has repeatedly labelled the accusations as “defamatory” and “distorted”.

ISLAMOPHOBIA

Meloni announces ban on burqa and niqab in Italian schools, cap on foreign students

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni
Copyright LaPresse

By Fortunato Pinto
Published on

Italy’s government is preparing new school measures, including a ban on niqabs. Meloni is facing competition from retired general Roberto Vannacci, who has called for tougher measures on migration.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has announced that the government is preparing a bill that would ban burqas and niqabs in schools and introduce a limit on the number of foreign pupils in each class.

Several European countries, including France and Belgium, already ban face coverings in public places. Austria has also introduced restrictions in schools. Elsewhere, including Spain and Poland, freedom of conscience and religion is protected by the constitution.

Meloni said a package of measures will soon go before the Italian cabinet, including a ban on burqas and niqabs in schools, a requirement for parents of pupils facing “serious difficulties integrating” into the national school system to learn Italian, and a limit on places for foreign pupils.

Italy heads to the polls next year, with competition intensifying to the right of Meloni’s party following the entry of retired general Roberto Vannacci, who has called for even tougher measures. Migration is a highly political and divisive issue in Italy.

“It is unacceptable that in an Italian classroom the children who end up feeling pushed into a corner are Italian children because they have become the minority. That cannot be allowed,” she said during a rally organised by Gioventù Nazionale, the youth wing of her Brothers of Italy party.

“Calling all this integration is yet another lie, a convenient lie for those who live off ideology, for those who preach to us from their living rooms and then send their own children to schools where this problem does not exist.”

Previous initiatives and legislative proposals

Meloni’s announcement comes after several related initiatives in recent months.

In early August, Education and Merit Minister Giuseppe Valditara proposed action on the full-face veil through an amendment to the security bill.

At the end of July, Futuro Nazionale — the party founded by far-right MEP Roberto Vannacci, who has backed Meloni’s proposal — tabled a resolution against the full-face veil in the Chamber of Deputies’ Culture Committee. It was approved with centre-right votes after being redrafted at the government’s request.

In March, the League introduced a bill in the Senate to amend Article 5 of the 1975 Reale law, which was introduced by then-Justice Minister Oronzo Reale during the Years of Lead to ban face coverings in public places.

The proposed amendment would create a new offence of forcing someone to conceal their face, punishable by one to two years in prison and fines of between €10,000 and €30,000. It would also bar those convicted from obtaining Italian citizenship.

Full-face veils in Europe

Meloni referred specifically to a ban on burqas and niqabs. A burqa traditionally covers the entire body and includes a mesh over the eyes, while a niqab covers the face, leaving only the eyes visible. A hijab, by contrast, covers the hair and neck but leaves the face uncovered.

Several European countries have introduced restrictions on face coverings in public spaces.

France imposed a nationwide ban on concealing the face in public places in April 2011, a measure later upheld by the European Court of Human Rights.

Belgium approved a nationwide ban in July 2011, with fines and prison sentences for violations. Bulgaria has prohibited full-face veils in state, administrative and educational institutions since September 2016.

Austria passed an anti-mask law in October 2017 requiring faces to remain visible in public spaces. From September 2026, girls up to the age of 14 will also be prohibited from wearing at school any veil that “covers the head according to Islamic traditions”.

Denmark introduced a nationwide ban in August 2018, with financial penalties increasing for repeat offences. The Netherlands introduced a partial ban in August 2019 covering schools, hospitals, government offices and public transport.

Switzerland introduced a federal ban on face coverings in public spaces following a national referendum, with the implementing legislation coming into force in 2023. Portugal completed its legislative process in August 2026 with a law banning face coverings in public spaces and imposing financial penalties.

Germany has no nationwide ban, but federal legislation prohibits public employees, judges, members of the armed forces and motorists from covering their faces while driving. Several Länder also restrict full-face veils in schools and universities for students and teachers.

Foreign pupils in the classroom

If Italy introduces a statutory maximum for foreign pupils in each class, it would become the first European country to adopt such a rule, according to the proposal.

Italy already has a 30% limit on non-Italian pupils, set out in a 2010 ministerial circular issued by then-Education Minister Mariastella Gelmini. The limit has often gone unenforced because of local demographic conditions and a lack of flexibility, particularly in urban outskirts.

Other European countries use different approaches.

Denmark has some of the most restrictive policies. The government has allowed upper secondary schools to introduce caps of up to 50% for pupils of “non-Western origin” or from disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Schools can also organise classes based on parents’ income, with the aim of encouraging social and ethnic mixing — a model the Italian government is watching with interest.

In France, quotas based on origin would be unconstitutional because the state does not collect statistics based on ethnic or religious identity. Instead, authorities use “zoning” to redesign school catchment areas, linking working-class and wealthier neighbourhoods. In areas with high concentrations of migrants, the state also reduces the number of pupils per class.

Criticism of Meloni’s proposal

Meloni’s announcement has received support from members of the governing coalition but has also drawn criticism from the opposition and legal experts.

Speaking to ANSA, Salvatore Curreri, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Enna, pointed to Article 34 of the Constitution, which states that “school is open to everyone”, including foreign children.

“If the measure were so restrictive as to uproot minors and their families to other areas, far from where they live, it could prove excessive precisely because it conflicts with the overriding functional aim of integration, with the risk of infringing a right recognised by the constitution,” Curreri said.

Angelo Bonelli, an MP for the Green and Left Alliance (AVS) and co-spokesperson for Green Europe, also criticised the proposal.

“Yet again, instead of dealing with schools, she is chasing the neo-fascist right of AfD and Vannacci, who has proposed separate classes for students with disabilities,” he said. “The truth is that the prime minister is not at all interested in how schools work. Our teachers’ salaries are among the lowest in Europe.”


BABUSHKA

 

US has deported 25,000 people to third countries under secretive deals, report shows

People deported from the US wait inside a processing centre in Guatemala City, 21 August, 2026
Copyright AP Photo

By Gavin Blackburn
Published on

Since US President Donald Trump took office in January 2025, Washington has been signing deals with developing countries to take migrants who cannot legally be sent home.

The United States has deported more than 25,000 people under secretive agreements with 35 countries to take migrants with no ties to those nations, according to an investigation published on Monday.

Since US President Donald Trump took office in January 2025, Washington has been signing deals with developing countries to take migrants who cannot legally be sent home.

The investigation by Forbidden Stories found the administration has earmarked $410 million (€357 million) to be paid directly to the receiving countries or to UN agencies to facilitate the returns.

At least 25,447 people had already been deported to third countries by 31 August 2026, according to data compiled by Forbidden Stories with a consortium of international journalists.

The vast majority, around 20,000, were sent to Mexico, but the rest were dispersed to 27 other countries across Latin America, Africa and the Pacific, and agreements have been finalised with seven more.

The deals vary, including over which nationalities can be deported and whether people with criminal records can be accepted.

An investigation by the AFP news agency earlier this year found Washington is using visa bans and restrictions on African countries to strongarm them into accepting deportees.

Lawyers told AFP that deportees were being thrown into a "legal black hole," held without charge in countries where they have no ties and few if any rights.

Forbidden Stories said 49 of Africa's 54 countries had been approached about accepting third-country deportees.

A little-known State Department division called the Office of Remigration, created in May 2025, has handled most of the negotiations and payments, according to Forbidden Stories.

The office is headed by Christian Jove Ehrhardt, a 41-year-old diplomat who previously worked as a security officer.

The report details his visits to Cameroon, which signed a memorandum of understanding with the US in December on accepting deportees. A week later, it also signed a five-year health assistance programme worth nearly $400 million (€348 million).

A handcuffed migrant stands by before he is deported by ICE agents in McAllen, 13 March, 2026 AP Photo

The following month, the State Department said it would provide a further $30 million (€26 million) to the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in Cameroon to "facilitate the voluntary return of refugees and combat illegal immigration."

The first plane carrying deportees arrived in Cameroon on 14 January.

Payments

Other agreements have involved direct payments to governments.

Palau, a small Pacific island nation with a population of under 18,000, signed an agreement in December 2025 to accept up to 75 third-country nationals in return for $7.5 million (€6.5 million).

However, only three people have so far been sent under the agreement.

In Eswatini, 32 people have arrived since July 2025 out of a possible 160 under an agreement worth more than $5 million (€4 million). It has accepted deportees with criminal records, the investigation found.

Of the $410 million planned for the agreements, internal State Department records showed that $81 million (€70 million) was earmarked for signatory governments.

A group of undocumented migrants is deported by ICE agents across the McAllen–Hidalgo–Reynosa International Bridge in McAllen, 13 March, 2026
A group of undocumented migrants is deported by ICE agents across the McAllen–Hidalgo–Reynosa International Bridge in McAllen, 13 March, 2026 AP Photo

The rest was intended for aid organisations, including more than $178 million (€155 million) for the UN's International Organisation for Migration and $123 million (€107 million) for UNHCR.

The agencies have faced criticism over their involvement, although UNHCR told Forbidden Stories that it was not party to the bilateral agreements and that US funding was being used in line with its mandate to strengthen asylum systems.

An IOM spokesperson told Forbidden Stories that the agency's decisions to accept funding rested "on a single question: whether our engagement will improve the lives of the migrants affected. In these instances, we believe strongly it does."