Trapped in Transit

Externalization Policies

Destination states make externalization policies, a kind of migration management strategy, to push their borders outward and stop prospective migrants from reaching their territory without prior authorization or vetting.

As a consequence, chokepoints are created at the departure countries. Not every place where there are many migrants, asylum seekers, or refugees gathered is necessarily a chokepoint. Some refugees just try to stay as close to their homelands as possible and aren’t necessarily trying to get to Europe.

Tunisia and the European Union

In 2023, Tunisia became the primary country of embarkation for migrants seeking to reach Europe, eclipsing Libya, which had been the main North African departure point for years. At least 97,306 migrants arrived in Italy from Tunisia in 2023, three times as many as in 2022.

In July 2023, the EU-Tunisia migration deal saved Tunisian President Kais Saied’s country from bankruptcy, but in return, Tunisia had to commit to curbing migration to Europe. Since then, his country has become a key partner of the European Union in the fight against migration on the Central Mediterranean route. 

Kais Saied is a challenging partner of the European Union in migration management and border externalization. He has taken Tunisia along an increasingly authoritarian path in recent years, but he argues he can provide political stability and curtail the flow of migrants to Europe. 

Border externalization, combined with policies that worsen conditions for migrants in transit countries, are among the primary factors responsible for chokepoints, especially across the Middle East and North Africa region.

Human Rights Deprivation

The number one thing people fleeing sub-Saharan and North African countries need is safety and stability, or, in legal terms, asylum. Although seeking asylum is a human right, it is often difficult for migrants to gain this legal status. The closest destination when leaving Tunisia is Italy, but the Italian government offers no clear path for asylum seekers from these countries of origin. 

This obstacle often leads asylum seekers to cross the borders illegally. Nonetheless, the Refugee Convention explicitly recognizes that “refugees may be compelled to enter a country of asylum irregularly to seek protection.” UN High Commissioner for Refugees has declared that “refugees should receive at least the same rights and basic help as any other foreigner who is a legal resident, including freedom of thought, of movement, and freedom from torture and degrading treatment.”

Sub-Saharan and North African migrants trying to reach Europe through the Central Mediterranean route struggle with a lack of legal assistance as well as access to healthcare, employment, and education.

Inadequate Living Conditions

The people stuck in Tunisia, unable to cross the sea to Europe live under dire conditions. That comes from the fact that asylum seekers are not being granted access to refugee camps as well as food, clean water, and safety. As the UN Refugee Agency states, an asylum seeker is a person who has left their home country under dangerous conditions, such as a war, and therefore is seeking asylum as a refugee in another country.

Even though refugee camps are not always considered safe, they often provide refugees with access to basic services. People stuck in limbo in Tunisia don’t even have the right to reach such a place. That’s why, Todman explained, “We see migrants living in really squalid conditions in Tunisia for longer periods of time. Many of these people have been forced to live in olive groves or sleep on the side of the street, for years on end.”

Mental Health Impacts

Trapped in a vicious cycle between Tunisia and Lampedusa, with no safe alternative on the horizon, many migrants and refugees have become further traumatized.

A 2019 psychological study about migration and refugees’ mental health in Tunisia reports that “while migration does not automatically imply resulting trauma, migration is a profound life transition that necessitates considerable adaptation on the part of the migrant. The way in which the life of a migrant influences their mental health evolves over time, as migration is characterized by periods of relative equilibrium and others of stress.”

At the same time, people migrating are victims of racism and discrimination, even by Tunisia’s authoritarian president himself. 

Externalizing Migration Control

In response to the influx of migration between Tunisia and Italy, the European Union has intensified border surveillance with the cooperation of Tunisia. Critics argue that these agreements shift the problem rather than solve it, leading to further consequences. 

Kelsey Norman, fellow for the Middle East at Rice University’s Baker Institute, noted that “before signing a major deal with Tunisia . . . there was no human rights assessment conducted to understand what the consequences of their support would be.” The European Union frames its approach as a strategy to reduce migrant arrivals, a metric that policymakers view as successful. Instead, Tunisian authorities forced people toward the Libyan border. There, those migrating voiced their urgent need for humanitarian aid. In other words, securitization amplifies human suffering rather than addressing it​. 

The European Union’s heavy-handed focus on border security raises serious questions about its commitment to human rights; policies towards Tunisia essentially foster authoritarian practices, questioning the European Union’s credibility as a human rights champion. 

North Africa’s Balancing Role

North African countries have acquired a dual role in the Mediterranean migration ecosystem as both transit hubs and gatekeepers. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s engagement with the Tunisian president solidifies how the 2023 agreement between Tunisia and Italy has created a shift in migration flows, making Tunisia a key launch point for sub-Saharan migrants. 

Despite their importance, North African states often lack the resources to manage migration effectively. However, as Todman observed, such assistance creates a dangerous dependency. “North African countries have an incentive to allow some migrants to keep taking this journey so that they continue to receive this kind of international support from the [European Union] and from European countries,” he explained. 

The Role of NGOs: Advocacy, Monitoring, and Humanitarian Aid

With state support often lacking, nongovernmental actors have become lifelines for migrants. They offer vital humanitarian aid, advocate for more humane migration policies, and document human rights violations at borders. However, their ability to operate often depends on the approval of government authorities. As Kelsey Norman explains, “International NGOs, and often domestic NGOs, too, have to get the permission of whether it’s the Ministry of the Interior or some other ministry in order to operate.”

With the current restrictions and crackdowns, this dependency has created a restrictive environment for aid workers, particularly in Tunisia. According to Todman, “members of some of these NGOs that were providing services . . . were so scared that they refused to talk to me . . . Some said they would only talk to me if we did it in private.” As a result, much of the support available to migrants now comes from informal networks within migrant communities themselves—a fragile system with critical gaps left by government inaction and NGO suppression.