Taliban Visas Open EU Returns Talks

The EU is trying to solve a problem it would rather not name too loudly: rejected Afghan asylum seekers can only be returned if the authorities in Kabul let the process work. According to NOS, Belgium issued one-day visas to five Taliban representatives expected in Brussels for Commission talks on returns. There is no public Belgian or EU record confirming that detail, but the machinery behind it is clear enough. Returns need documents, airport access and acceptance on arrival. Since 2021, those practical levers have been in Taliban hands.

The Visa Door

The EU has allowed contact with Taliban officials without recognising the Taliban government since the Council set out its Afghanistan position in 2021. On paper, the distinction is neat. In practice, it becomes awkward as soon as a government tries to remove someone. A return flight cannot land on diplomatic semantics. Someone in Kabul has to receive the person being sent back.

If the NOS account is right, Belgium’s role would be narrow but politically exposed. Under the EU Visa Code, Belgium controls entry to its own territory for this kind of short stay. Article 25 allows a visa valid only for limited territory in exceptional cases.

That would still leave another gate to pass through. If any delegate is on the UN Taliban sanctions list, Belgium would also have to fit the visit through the UN’s travel-ban exemption process. A one-day visa would not, by itself, do the legal work.

Talks Are Not A Deal

The Commission can open a channel. It cannot, by itself, bind the EU to a readmission agreement with the Taliban. EU law gives the bloc room to negotiate returns arrangements, but formal international agreements still go through the treaty machinery, including Article 79(3) and Article 218.

That map of power matters because national governments are under pressure to prove that failed asylum cases can end in removal. Germany shows the limits. Berlin deported 28 Afghan men to Kabul in August 2024, describing them as convicted offenders, on a flight reportedly arranged through Qatar (PBS/AP, Al Jazeera). Reuters later reported that Germany was interested in direct talks with the Taliban.

The pattern so far is narrow, mediated and legally exposed. Governments can promise tougher returns. Delivering them means dealing with a counterpart they do not want to legitimise.

Austria has also pushed to keep Afghan return options open, including in the 2021 effort reported by Reuters. Denmark’s EU presidency programme puts returns and cooperation with non-EU countries high among its published priorities. Belgium, as host state, would face the immediate scrutiny over visas, sanctions and whether contact has begun to look too much like recognition.

The Rights Limit

No meeting in Brussels removes the legal ban on sending someone into serious harm. The EU Return Directive requires respect for non-refoulement, the rule against returning people to danger. The Charter bars removals where there is a serious risk of torture or inhuman treatment.

Courts can still stop removals case by case. The European Court of Human Rights made that protection absolute under Article 3 in Saadi v Italy. Current EUAA guidance on Afghanistan still identifies groups facing serious risk, while Amnesty and Human Rights Watch describe severe Taliban repression, especially against women and girls.

Contact is not recognition. The harder questions are more practical: who entered Belgium, under what visa and sanctions basis, and whether any understanding on returns was being sought. Europe’s returns policy is now pressing against Taliban control of Afghan territory. The most sensitive part of that negotiation may be taking place out of public view.