Western Balkans annual risk analysis 2010.
Date: 2010-02-10
Institutions: Frontex
Subjects: EU visa policy, European security, Western Balkans, border control, external border of the EU, illegal migration, migration control

Western Balkans  
Annual Risk Analysis 
2010 

European  Agency  for  the  Management  of  Operational  Cooperation  at  the  External  Borders  of  the  Member 
States of the European Union 

PUBLIC  VERSION 

FRONTEX 

Warsaw, May/June 

2010 

European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the 

External Borders of the Member States of the European Union 
(FRONTEX) 
Rondo 1 

00-124 Warsaw 

Poland 

2 

 
Table of Contents 

1.

Introduction

2. Methodology

2.1.  Background 

2.2.  Data collection and additional information 

3. Situation at the borders

4. Analysis

4.1  Albanian irregular migration 

4.2. Western Balkans as an entry point for transit migration 

4.3. Transiting flow by land from Greece 

5. Environmental scan

6. Outlook

4 

5 

5 

6 

8 

18 

19 

23 

24 

28 

30 

3 

 
 
1.  Introduction 

This  first  annual  risk  analysis  (WB-ARA)  has  been  developed  jointly  in 

accordance with the Frontex May 2009 proposal to establish a permanent 

Western  Balkan  Risk  Analysis  Network  (WB-RAN)  between  the  Risk 

Analysis  Units  of  the  competent  border-control  authorities  of  Albania, 

Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH),  Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of 

Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Frontex Risk Analysis Unit (RAU). 

Given the current scope of regular information exchange in the context of 

WB-RAN  and  Frontex  Risk  Analysis  Network  (FRAN),  the  WB-ARA 

focuses mainly on the threat of irregular migration. The public version of 

the  first  annual    risk  analysis  is  structured  around  the  following  main 

elements: (1) a description of the situation through a set of indicators on 

irregular  migration,  (2)  a  short  analysis  of  the  three  distinctive  irregular 

migration flows, impacting both the area of Western Balkans and Member 

States, and (3) forecasts. The restricted version of the analysis describes  

also  factors  likely  to  influence  irregular  migration  in  the  area  of  Western 

Balkans  and  the  EU.  It  concludes  with  recommendations  aimed  at 

addressing 

identified 

vulnerabilities 

and 

strengthening 

border 

management and border security.  

Frontex  Risk  Analysis  Unit  would  like  to  thank  all  FRAN  and  WB-RAN  

members,  in  particular  Albania,  who  was  tasked  first  (according  to 
alphabetical order) to compile the statistical data set. 

PUBLIC 

4 

2.  Methodology 

2.1.  Background 

In November 2008, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed 

between  the  following  Western  Balkan  countries:  Albania,  Bosnia  and 

Herzegovina 

(BiH),  Croatia, 

the  Former  Yugoslav  Republic  of 

Macedonia , Montenegro and Serbia  establishing “a system of statistical 

information  exchange  on  irregular  migration  and  the  participation  in  a 

regional  early  warning  system”.  The  MoU  was  developed  within  the 

context  of  the  EU  funded  AENEAS  project  and  with  the  support  of 

Frontex.  In    article  3,  the  MoU  specified  that  “once  per  year  an  overall 

analysis should be made, carried out by the national body of the country 

*This refers to the lead country during the report-

responsible for the collation of all national reports.”* Article 3 is the basis 

ing  year.  The  first  lead  country  (reporting  year 

for this report. 

2009), was Albania, according to the alphabetical 

order of WB-RAN countries’ names.  

Frontex  contributed  on  several  occasions  to  the  development  of  the 

information  exchange  system,  in  particular  with  respect  to  templates  for 

the  type  of  data  to  be  exchanged  and  tools  for  implementing  the 

exchange.  In  addition,  Frontex  contributed  to  the  training  of  WB-RAN 

countries’ risk analysis experts. The WB-RAN countries agreed to use the 

slightly adapted FRAN data collection templates (2008 version).  

Similarly  to  the  information  exchange  within  the  FRAN,  the  Commission 

and  Frontex  set  up  a  secure  Internet  platform  on  the  European 

Commission’s  Circa  server  to  facilitate  the  exchange  of  information 

between the WB-RAN countries and Frontex.  

The  members  of  the  network  have  agreed  to  initiate  statistical  data 

exchange from January 2009 and have been meeting at least once a year 

in  a  joint  meeting  with  FRAN  members.  Additional  technical  meetings 

were organised when deemed necessary.   

5 

PUBLIC 

 
2.2.  Data collection and  

The  backbone  of  this  analysis  is  composed  of  the  WB-RAN  countries’ 

additional information  

monthly  statistical  data,  covering  the  twelve  months  of  2009  and  the  first 

quarter  of  2010  (when  indicated).  This  regular  data  collection  exercise 

focuses on six key indicators, specific to the threat of irregular migration: (1) 

detections  of  irregular  border-crossing,  (2)  detections  of  facilitators,  (3) 

detections of irregular stay, (4) refusals of entry, (5) asylum applications and 

(6)  detections  of  false  documents.  The  data  collected  is  categorised  by 

border type (land, air and sea) and by land border sections, i.e. borders with 

different neighbouring EU Member States. Frontex was also able to analyse 

reference  period  data  from  Greece,  Bulgaria,  Romania,  Hungary  and 

Slovenia as well as data from other Member States where relevant.  

Related  reports  such  as  Frontex  ARA  2010,  FRAN  bi-monthly  analytical 

reports and several Frontex Tailored Risk Analyses conducted in 2008 and 

2009  were  valuable  sources  of  information.  A  substantial  amount  of 

information  was  also  provided  through  the  analysis  of  the  materials 

collected during different Frontex coordinated joint operations.  

The  WB-RAN  countries  were  not  addressed  with  specific  requests  for 

information for this analysis, but instead, regularly and promptly responded 

to all Frontex queries related to specific issues.  

A  preparatory  meeting  with  risk  analysis  experts  from  the  WB-RAN 

countries and Frontex was organised on the Agency’s premises in order to 

discuss  the  overall  structure  of  this  analysis  and  to  gather  additional 

information  related  to  the  threat  of  irregular  migration  affecting  both  the 

Western  Balkan  region  and  Member  States.  The  WB-RAN  countries  also 

provided  the  analysis  of  the  situation  of  irregular  migration  within  their 

countries and common borders with other WB-RAN countries. 

PUBLIC 

6 

 
 
 
Quality of the available data 

The quality of the statistical data on irregular migration depends on several 

factors. For example, the number of detections of irregular border-crossing 

is  not  only  a  function  of  the  number  of  persons  attempting  to  cross  the 

border irregularly, but also, the effort of border-control authorities to detect 

them.  Increasing  detections  might  be  due  to  a  rise  in  persons  attempting 

irregular crossing or might be a result of enhanced resources to detect such 

crossings. 

The  statistical  data  used  for  this  analysis  should  not  be  considered  as 

official  statistics  but  as  a  means  of  management  of  information  to  support 

the  planning  of  joint  operational  activities.  The  data  might  therefore 

occasionally vary from data published officially by national authorities. 

The  use  of  slightly  adapted  FRAN  monthly  statistical  templates  from  2008 

by the WB-RAN countries created certain compatibility issues between the 

FRAN and WB-RAN data sets. In particular, detections for irregular border-

crossing  at  border  crossing-points  (BCPs),  as  reported  by  the  WB-RAN 

countries,  should  be  analysed  with  caution  since  they  also  include  figures 

for persons using forged documents and are thus reported twice. 

7 

PUBLIC 

3. Situation at the borders 

As  described  in  the  Frontex  Annual  Risk  Analysis  2010,  reduced  job 

opportunities  in  the  EU  (the  global  economic  crisis)  and  the  intensified 

operational  cooperation  with  some  key  transit  countries  in  Africa  have 

greatly  contributed  to  decreasing  the  trend  for  most  indicators  used  to 

monitor the migration pressure at the EU external borders.  

In  the  Western  Balkan  region  this  trend  was  also  observed  in  2009. 

However,  two  developments  stand  out:  (1)  a  counter-cyclical  increasing 

trend of irregular border-crossing was reported by Serbia and Hungary and, 

(2)  irregular  border-crossing  at  the  Albanian-Greek  border  continued  to  be 

reported in very high numbers. 

3.1.  Irregular border-crossing 

In 2009, there was a total of 67,419 detections of irregular border-crossing 

reported  by  WB-RAN  countries  and  neighbouring  EU  Member  States  at 

Between BCPs* 

highest  pressure.  Almost  90%  of  irregular  border-crossing  cases  were 

their common borders. The map below shows the border sections with the 

reported  at  the  Greek-Albanian  land  border,  where  a  vast  majority  of 

detected  persons  were  Albanian,  crossing  the  border  from  Albania  to 

Greece. 

Detections of irregular border-crossing between BCPs in 2009 

*Number  of  people  detected  by  State 

authorities  when  entering  or  attempting  to 

enter    the  territory  between  border  crossing-

points (BCPs) at external borders. 

Source: FRAN and WB-RAN as of 15 May 2010  

8 

PUBLIC 

Albania-Greece 

Two thirds of irregular migrants were detected on the Greek side, while the 

rest  had  been  stopped  already  in  Albania.  Combined,  the  detections  on 

both  sides  followed  a  clear  seasonal  pattern.  There  were,  however,  some 

important differences between the two sides. For example, detections in the 

third  quarter  dropped  by  35%  on  the  Albanian  side,  and  only  8%  on  the 

Greek side. Moreover, in the fourth quarter, detections on the Albanian side 

rose by 9%, while the Greek authorities detected almost 30% less irregular 

migrants compared to the previous quarter. 

Quarterly detections of irregular border-crossing at Greek-Albanian 

border 

14000

12000

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

0
2009 - 1

2009 - 2

2009 - 3

2009 - 4

2010 - 1

Greece 

Albania 

Source:  WB-RAN  and  FRAN  as  of  15  May 

Comparing  2008  and  2009,  detections  on  both  sides  followed  a  rather 

stable trend, while the figures from the first quarter of 2010 suggest even a 

10% increase.  

Hungary-Serbia 

With  a  total  of  3,609  cases  of  irregular  border-crossing,  the  Hungarian-

Serbian border section is ranked second in terms of overall detections (5% 

of  the  total).  Almost  70%  of  detections  occurred  on  the  Hungarian  side  of 

the border, thus indicating  a  similar  overall  ratio between  detections as in 

the case of the Greek-Albanian border.  

The flow was directed almost exclusively from Serbia to Hungary. The peak 

was reached in the third quarter (mainly September and October) of 2009. 

Surprisingly  and  contrary  to  the  usual  seasonal  pattern,  there  was  a 

significant decrease of detections in the second quarter (compared with the 

first).  The  decrease  was  particularly  strong  on  the  Serbian  side  and  was 

mainly linked with significantly lower detections in May 2009.  

PUBLIC 

9 

In terms of  yearly trends, available FRAN  data suggest a 17% increase of 

detections on the Hungarian side in 2009, while in Serbia, authorities have 

reported  a  staggering  237%  increase  on  their  side  of  the  common  border. 

Both developments were somewhat associated with increasing numbers of 

detected  Afghan nationals.  

Importantly,  however,  overall  detections  in  the  first  quarter  of  2010  

decreased by 36%, a development linked with visa liberalisation for Serbian 

nationals.  Still,  the  subsequent  changes  in  the  composition  of  this  flow 

suggest a direct link  with secondary movements of  irregular migrants from 

Greece. This phenomenon, including the mentioned increased detections of 

transiting Afghan nationals, is analysed in detail in another chapter. 

Quarterly  detections  of  irregular  border-crossing  on  both  sides  of 

different border sections 

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0
2009 - 1

2009 - 2

2009 - 3

2009 - 4

2010 - 1

Hungary-Serbia

Slovenia-Croatia

Greece-FYROM

FYROM-Albania

Source: WB-RAN and FRAN as of 15 May 2010  

10 

PUBLIC 

Former  Yugoslav  Republic  of 

Authorities  on  both  sides  of  the  border  between  the  Former  Yugoslav 

Macedonia-Greece 

Republic  of  Macedonia  and  Greece  reported  2,526  cases  of  irregular 

border-crossing  out  of  which  only  7%  were  detected  by  the  Former 

Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. While most migrants attempted to cross 

irregularly into Greece during the second and third quarter of 2009 (clear 

seasonality),  the  Former  Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia  reported  an 

opposite trend, with most migrants detected during the first and the fourth 

quarter.  

In  the  same  way  the  ratio  between  detections  of  a  particular  nationality 

differed  extensively.  Namely,  in  2009,  the  Greek  authorities  detected 

altogether  2,167  Albanians  (92%  of  the  total),  trying  to  cross  from  the 

Former  Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia  into  Greece.  Authorities  in 

Skopje,  on  the  other  hand,  reported  only  two  Albanians,  suggesting  a 

clear  1:0  ratio.  However,  with  107  detentions  on  the  Former  Yugoslav 

Republic of Macedonia side and 84 on the Greek side, the 2009 ratio for 

detections of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia nationals trying 

to cross into Greece seems to be closer to 1:1.  

During  the  first  quarter  of  2010,  detections  on  both  sides  of  the  border 

decreased by 18% when compared to the reference period in 2009.   

Quarterly detections of irregular border crossing at the  

Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia-Greece border 

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0
2009 - 1

2009 - 2

2009 - 3

2009 - 4

Greece

FYROM

Source: FRAN and WB-RAN as of 15 May 2010 

70
60

50
40

30
20

10
0
2010 - 1

PUBLIC 

11 

Croatia-Slovenia 

There  were  1,376  cases  of  irregular  border-crossing  reported  by  Croatia 

and  Slovenia  at  their  common  border  in  2009.  The  figure  represents  a 

decrease  compared  to  2008  (14%  in  Croatia  and  34%  in  Slovenia). 

Detections  were  relatively  stable  throughout  the  year,  suggesting  a  less-

pronounced  seasonality.  The  vast  majority  of  irregular  migrants  were 

detected while trying to exit Croatia and enter Slovenia.  

Importantly,  more  than  half  (57%)  of  the  detections  were  reported  by 

Croatia.  Combined,  76%  of  all  detected  irregular  migrants  were  from  the 

region of Western Balkans.  

The  decreasing  trend  in  irregular  border-crossing  continued  into  the  first 

quarter  of  2010,  with  a  combined  drop  of  32%  reported  by  Slovenia  and 

Croatia.  

Albania–  the  Former  Yugoslav 

There were 1,166 cases of detected irregular border-crossing at the border 

Republic of Macedonia 

between Albania and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in 2009. 

The vast majority  of persons irregularly  crossing the  border  were Albanian 

nationals (99,9%). Almost 92% of the detections were made on one side of 

the border, in this case in by the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia .  

Considering  the  general  direction  of  the  flow  towards  Greece,  available 

figures seem to suggest that one person could be detected several times at 

different border sections between Albania, the Former Yugoslav Republic of 

Macedonia  and Greece.  

14 

PUBLIC 

g
n
i
t
e
e
m
y
r
o
t
a
r
a
p
e
r
p
N
A
R
B
W

-

:
e
c
r
u
o
S

Irregular  migrants discovered in a truck in the Former Yugoslav 

Republic of  Macedonia 

At BCPs  

The  WB-RAN  countries  and  their  neighbours  reported  1,473  cases  of 

irregular  border-crossing  at  BCPs  in  2009.  Given  the  current  WB-RAN 

monthly  statistical  template’s  definitions*,  the  WB-RAN  countries  also 

include the use of forged documents in this category.  Therefore, relatively 

high numbers, reported for some nationalities, should not be regarded as a 

measure for clandestine method of entry (hiding in vehicles). 

More than three quarters  of detections  were reported  at land borders. The 

highest numbers  were detected in the third  (441) and fourth quarter (384); 

lower numbers were reported for the first (348) and second quarter (300).  

Serbian  nationals  were  reported  most  frequently.  Similarly,  significant 

*The  category  covers  incidents  of  illegal  entry  or 

exit  whether  it  was  committed  by  avoiding  border 

checks,  by  employing  some  sort  of  deception  (the 

use  of  a  fraudulent  document,  hiding  in  the 

transportation means etc.) in order to gain entry or 

exit or by failing to comply with a decision to refuse 

numbers  of  Turkish  nationals  were  reported  by  Serbia,  Bosnia  and 

or prohibit the subject's entry. 

Herzegovina  and  Croatia  (mainly  linked  to  the  use  of  false  documents). 

Only 80 Afghans were detected by Greece and the WB-RAN authorities at 

their common  BCPs, suggesting a clear preference of Afghan migrants for 

irregular border-crossing between BCPs. 

PUBLIC 

13 

 
 
 
 
3.2.  Facilitators* 

There  were  1,015  cases  of  reported  facilitators  in  the  WB-RAN  countries 

and  neighbouring  FRAN  Members  in  2009.  Unsurprisingly,  the  highest 

number of facilitators was reported at the land border between Albania and 

Greece.  However,  with  one  detected  facilitator  for  every  134  cases  of 

irregular  border-crossing,  the  border  section  between  Albania  and  Greece 

trails  far  behind  the  border  section  between  Croatia  and  Slovenia,  where 

one  facilitator  per  every  seven  cases  of  irregular  border-crossing  was 

detected.  

Detections  of  facilitators  per  number  of  irregular  border-crossing  cases, 

broken down by the main land  border sections, 2009 

Bordr section 

Detected 

Irregular 

IBC/Facilitators 

facilitators 

border-

crossing 

ratio 

SLO-HRV 

BiH-HRV 

HUN-SRB 

MKD-GRC 

ALB-GRC 

ALB-MKD 

197 

31 

148 

48 

421 

2 

1,376 

598 

3,609 

2,526 

56,589 

1,166 

7 

19 

24 

53 

134 

583 

Source: FRAN and WB-RAN as of 15 May 2010 

The  table  shows  the  limited  need  for  facilitation  of  irregular  border-

crossing 

from  Albania 

to  Greece.  Additionally, 

it  also  reflects 

differences in the amount of administrative efforts put into detection of 

facilitators. 

*Person  intercepted  who  have  intentionally  assisted 

migrants  to  illegaly  enter  to  or  exit  from  the  territory. 

The  data  set  does  not  include  pesrsons  detected  for 

assisting with illegal stay of a foreign national. 

Nationality of detected  

facilitators in 2009 

Source: FRAN and WB-RAN as of 15 May 2010 

14 

PUBLIC 

 
3.3.  Irregular stay* 

A  large  majority  of  detected  irregular  stayers  were  from  WB-RAN 

countries. Their irregular stay does not represent a major problem, since 

they are regularly readmitted to their country of origin. Notwithstanding a 

general  decrease  in  the  region,  Serbia  and  Slovenia  reported  a  yearly 

increase of 283% and 18% respectively.  

The  main  reason  for  the  increase  of  detections  of  persons  staying 

*Number  of  persons  who  have  been  detected  by 

proper  authorities  while  not  fulfilling,  or  no  longer 

fulfilling, the conditions for stay or residence during 

the reference month, be it that they were detected 

inland or while trying to exit the territory. 

irregularly  in  Serbia  is  linked  with  secondary  movements  of  Afghan 

nationals  coming  from  Greece.  The  reason  for  the  increase  in  irregular 

stay in Slovenia is mainly due to detected overstayers exiting the country.   

3.4.  Refusals of entry*  WB-RAN and neighbouring countries refused entry to 68,450 persons on 

their joint borders in 2009. The refusals follow a clear seasonal pattern, in 

line  with  regular  passenger  flow  variations  (summer  peaks  and  winter 

lows). Similarly to the detection of irregular border-crossing and irregular 

stay,  only  Serbia  reported  a  36%  increase  of  refused  persons  at  its 

borders.  

Nationals  of  the  WB-RAN  countries  were  the  most  refused  group  (56%  of 

the  total).  With  more  than  12,000  refusals,  nationals  from  Bosnia  and 

Herzegovina ranked the first. They were refused mainly on the border with 

Croatia.  Serbian  nationals  were  reported  as  the  second  largest  group 

refused  entry.  As  in  the  case  of  nationals  from  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina, 

40% of Serbian nationals were refused by Croatian authorities at the border 

with Serbia.  

Refusals of entry  

*Number  of  persons  refused  entry  at  the  external 

borders.This  category  only  those  persons  who 

were refused entry by proper authorities according 

to respective national legislation. 

PUBLIC 

Source: WB-RAN as of 15 May 2010 

15 

Importantly, Turkish nationals were by far the main refused nationality at the 

air borders of WB-RAN countries, with 1,269 detections or 45% of the total in 

2009. Most of them were refused by Croatia, followed by Serbia and Former 

Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.  

Estimated  refusals  of  entry  per  100,000  passengers  on  the    WB-RAN 

countries borders, 2009 

Passengers 

Refusals of 

Number of 

entry 

refusals/100,000 

passengers 

Serbia 

46,953,261 

21,735 

FYR of Macedonia 

11,658,417 

Montenegro 

10,785,499 

3,283 

2,020 

Croatia 

141,383,447 

23,563 

Bosnia and H. 

51,432,186 

4,874 

Albania 

10,125,469 

471 

Total 

272,338,279 

55,946 

46 

28 

19 

17 

9 

5 

21 

Source: WB-RAN (as of 15 May) and April 2010 preparatory meeting 

3.5.  Detections of false 

In 2009, WB-RAN countries detected 864 false documents and 852 persons 

documents* 

using them. Figures show that Serbian nationals represent 40% of the total, 

followed by nationals of Albania (16%) and Turkey (15%).  

Serbia  reported  the  highest  numbers  of  false  documents,  although  the 

detections  on  their  borders  decreased  by  more  than  50%  compared  to 

2008.  A decrease of false documents detection was also reported by other 

WB-RAN  countries.  It  is  likely  that  the  trend  is  linked  to  a  decrease  in 

regular passenger flow.  

Serbian  nationals  were  mostly  detected  at  the  border  section  between 

Serbia  and  the  Former  Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia  using  Serbian 

documents. Serbian travel documents are abused most frequently (19% of 

the total) .  

*Number  of  persons  who  were  detected  by 

authorities  during  border  checks  at  BCPs  who 

attempted  to  use  false  travel  documents,  false 

visas  or  false  permissions  to  stay  etc.  for  the 

purpose of entering or exiting the territory. 

16 

PUBLIC 

  
The detection of forged documents is relatively small in comparison with the 

passenger flow of estimated 272 million passengers crossing the WB-RAN 

borders  in  2009.  This  low  level  of  detections  signals  limited  need  for 

document abuse  given that a vast majority of regular passengers originate 

from the region itself (visa free travel)   

Nationality of false document users 

Source: WB-RAN as of 15 May 2010 

Origin of false documents 

Source: WB-RAN as of 15 May 2010 

17 

PUBLIC 

4.  Analysis 

*Kosovo under UNSCR 1244 

Analysis of the available statistical data, additional information provided  by 

the  WB-RAN  countries  and  relevant  Frontex-coordinated  joint  operations 

clearly  points  to  the  existence  of  three  distinctive  irregular  migration  flows, 

impacting  both  the  area  of  the  Western  Balkans  and  EU  Member  States. 

The  distinction  between  the  three  is  based  on  the  size,  composition, 

direction, number of affected countries and main modus operandi.  

In terms of the overall size, the irregular migration flow, composed mainly of 

Albanians  from  Albania  (and  Kosovo*),  is  by  far  the  most  important.  It  is 

driven  by  economic  necessities  and  seasonal  work.  In  terms  of  border 

management,  this  flow  affects  mainly  Albania  and  Greece  and  to  a  much 

lesser extent the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, 

Hungary and Italy.  

A transiting flow by land from Greece to Hungary (and further towards other 

European  countries),  composed  of  migrants  from  southern  Asia,  Middle-

East and Africa, represents an increasingly growing threat to the integrity of 

the  borders  in  the  Western  Balkan  region  and  internal  security/migration 

policies  in  the  EU.  It  clearly  highlights  several  vulnerabilities  related  to  the 

management  of  common  borders,  asylum  procedures  and 

return 

operations,  both  in  Greece  and  in  the  Western  Balkans.  Therefore,  it  is 

discussed in more detail as an “issue in focus”.   

The third distinctive flow is much smaller in size but quite diverse in terms of 

modus  operandi  and  the  number  of  affected  border  types.  Its  main 

characteristic  is  linked  to  the  fact  that  the  Western  Balkan  region  is  itself 

considered  as  the  entry  point  into  Europe.  The  flow  consists  largely  of 

Turkish nationals, arriving in the Western Balkans by air as legal travellers 

(visa free regime) and later continuing to the EU, either clandestinely, with 

false documents, or through the green borders.    

PUBLIC 

18 

Overview table, summarising the three distinctive irregular flows, impacting both the area of the Western Balkans 

and Member States 

Estimated 

Composition 

Modus oper-

Main affected 

Border 

Trend 

relative 

share 

andi 

countries 

type 

Transiting 

10% 

South Asia, 

green border 

Greece- FY-

land 

increasing 

by land from 

Greece 

Albanian 

irregular 

migration 

North Africa, 

crossing, limited 

ROM-Serbia-

or no facilitation, 

Hungary-

Sub-Saharan 

hidden in vehi-

destination 

Africa 

cles 

Member 

States 

88% 

Albania, Serbia 

green border 

Albania-

(Kosovo) 

crossing, limited 

Greece, Italy 

land, 

sea 

stable 

or no facilitation 

Entry point 

2% 

Turkish  

legal travel, 

WB-RAN 

air, land 

stable 

WB 

subsequent 

countries, 

irregular border-

Slovenia, 

crossing, use of 

false documents 

4.1.  Albanian irregular  

Albanian  migration  (legal  and  irregular)  to  the  Member  States  is 

  migration 

economically driven, circular in character and focuses mainly on the low-

skilled,  low-wage  and  informal  sectors  of  the  economy.  It  has  a  strong 

seasonal  character,  closely  connected  to  the  availability  of  work  in  the 

Greek informal labour sector. Albanian male migrants are mainly engaged 

in construction or agriculture, whereas women are employed in domestic 

work.  

The  main  destination  countries  for  Albanian  migrants  are  two  of  the 

country’s  neighbours:  Greece  and  Italy.  Greece  is  a  preferred  by 

Albanians  from  the  south  and  south-east  areas  populated  mainly  by 

Albanian  Orthodox  Christians  and  ethnic  Greeks.  Meanwhile,  Italy  is  a 

more  preferred  destination  for  Albanians  from  the  central  and  western 

areas.* The 2009 FRAN data for irregular stay (and exit) clearly confirms 

the  preference  for  Greece  and  Italy,  since  93%  of  detected  Albanian 

irregular stayers are reported by the two Member States. 

*IOM,  Migration  in  Albania:  A  Country  Profile 

As  indicated  by  the  detection  figures,  Albanian  irregular  migrants  mainly 

2008 

19 

use a direct land route to Greece, although some also transit through the 

Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Conversely, migrants frequently 

reach Italy on a regular ferry from Greece. A small proportion of irregular 

migrants  also  transits  Montenegro,  Serbia  (Kosovo),  Croatia,  Hungary 

and Slovenia before trying to enter Italy. 

PUBLIC 

  
From Albania to Greece  

The irregular migration pressure at the Greek-Albanian border is by far the 

highest  compared  to  other  border  sections  in  the  Western  Balkans. 

Combined, the detections for irregular border-crossing on both sides of the 

border reached almost 90% of the regional total in 2009. In the first quarter 

of 2010 this share rose almost to 95%.  

Furthermore,  detections  of  Albanian  nationals  at  the  Greek  side  of  the 

border  constituted  a  massive  66%  of  total  detections  at  the  external  land 

borders of the EU in 2009. However, multiple crossings by one person are 

common, therefore, the number represents cases, not persons.  

Often facilitators lack the capacity to plan and execute a complete trip from 

Albania to the intended destination in Greece. Instead, each step is done on 

an  ad  hoc  basis.  Moreover,  only  26  facilitators  were  detected  by  Albanian 

authorities  in  2009,  clearly  indicating  either  non-existent  or  unconsolidated 

and non-hierarchical nature of the facilitation.  

From Albania to Italy  

In comparison with Greece, irregular flow to Italy is relatively small. The use 

of speedboats for clandestine entry, a typical modus operandi in the 1990s, 

has  been  practically  reduced  to  zero  due  to  a  moratorium  on  the  use  of 

navigable  means  in  Albanian  territorial  waters  and  Albanian-Italian  joint 

patrolling of the sea.  

Therefore,  to  reach  Italy,  Albanian  irregular  migrants  mostly  use  regular 

ferry  connections,  either  from  Albania  or  from  Greece  (indirect  route).  It  is 

likely that the direct route is not the preferred option, given the existence of 

border  checks  on  the  Albanian  and  Italian  side  of  the  sea  border.  This 

notion  is  further  corroborated  by  relatively  low  numbers  of  refusals  for 

Albanian nationals in Italian ports.  

Choosing  the  indirect  option  usually  entails  irregular  crossing  of  the 

Albanian-Greek  border  in  the  southern  Albanian  district  of  Seranda,  from 

where migrants continue to the nearby Greek port of Igoumenitisa, or travel 

further south to the port of Patras.  

A  portion  of  irregular  migrants  from  Albania  specifically  choose  to  go  to 

Italy through Greece due to perceived easiness of travel in the Schengen 

area and the availability of fraudulent  travel documents in Greece.  

20 

PUBLIC 

From  Albania  to  the  Former 
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 
and further towards Greece 

Albanian  nationals  are  able  to  travel  to  the  neighbouring  Former  Yugoslav 

Republic  of  Macedonia  without  visa  obligation  since  April  2008.    After 

entering,  either  legally  or  irregularly,  local  groups  transport  Albanian 

migrants  closer  to  the  border  with  Greece  (Gevgelija  region*),  where 

accommodation in small hotels is provided.  

They later cross the border  with Greece in a similar fashion, either on foot 

or in a vehicle. As an indication  of its size, this flow  represented less than 

3%  of  the  total  Albanian  irregular  flow  to  Greece  during  the  first  three 

months of 2010. In terms of trend, the first quarter 2010 detections suggest 

a moderate decrease compared to the reference period in 2009.  

*Gevgelija  has  a  population  of  15,685  and  is 

located in the very southeast part of the Former 

Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia,  at  the  coun-

try's  main  BCP  with  Greece  (Bogorodica-

Facilitation services in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 

Criminal investigations of Albanian irregular migration have demonstrated 

Evzoni).  This  BCP  lies  on  the  main  motorway, 

the following elements: 

linking Skopje, Belgrade, Zagreb and Ljubljana 

with Thessaloniki in Greece. 







the  use  of  taxi  companies  for  transportation  close  to  the  border 

with Greece;  

unlicensed taxi drivers often cross the border;  

small motels or hotels close to the border with Greece are used as 

“safe houses”;  

Irregular  migrants  using  unlicensed  taxis  to  cross  irregularly  to 
Greece 

g
n
i
t
e
e
m
y
r
o
t
a
r
a
p
e
r
p
N
A
R
B
W

-

:
e
c
r
u
o
S

21 

PUBLIC 

 
 
 
 
Transiting  Montenegro  or  Serbia 

Albanians  from  the  territory  of  Kosovo  and  Albania  are  able  to  travel  to 

(Kosovo)  and  further  towards  the 

Montenegro  without  visa  obligation  since  November  2009.  Migrants 

EU 

therefore often enter Montenegro legally with cars or buses. Once there, 

most opt for the land route and transit Montenegro using public transport. 

They 

irregularly  cross 

the  border  with  Croatia  (or  Bosnia  and 

Herzegovina) in smaller groups. 

Some  Albanian  migrants  are  also  believed  to  use  regular  ferry  links 

between  the  port  of  Bar  (Montenegro)  and  the  port  of  Bari  (Italy),  either 

hiding  in  trucks  and  buses  or  using  falsified  documents.  According  to 

Montenegrin authorities, Albanians have also been detected attempting to 

cross the Adriatic on vessels carrying 10-20 persons.  

Other  reported  option  involves  routing  through  or  starting  from  the 

territory  of Kosovo. The route  goes either through Croatia and Slovenia 

or,  in  the  case  of  Albanians  from  Kosovo,  through  Hungary.  In  some 

cases, migrants are escorted until their destination for prices that amount 

to 2,800 EUR.  

In  2009,  67,415  Albanian  citizens  were  readmitted  based  on  a 

readmission  agreement  with 

the  EU.  The 

figure,  represented  a 

substantial  11%  decrease,  compared  to  2008.  The  vast  majority  of 

readmitted persons came from Greece.  

f
o

y
r
t
s
n
M

i

i

n
i
r
g
e
n
e
t
n
o
M

:
e
c
r
u
o
S

r
o
i
r
e
t
n
I

Sailing  boat  “Lutalica”,  detected  in  Monte-

negrin  territorial  waters,  carrying  19  Alba-

nian irregular migrants towards Italy     

22 

PUBLIC 

 
 
 
 
 
 
4.2.  Western Balkans as an 

WB-RAN countries, with the exception of Serbia (but including the territory 

entry point for migration 

transiting Turkey 

of  Kosovo),  share  a  visa-free  travel  regime  with  Turkey.  In  terms  of  direct 

regular  passenger  flow,  there  are  currently  around  48  weekly  flights  from 

Turkey  to  Albania,  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina,  Montenegro,  Croatia  and 

Serbia (Kosovo).  

Unsurprisingly,  Turkish  nationals  are  by  far  the  most  refused  nationality  at 

the  external  air  borders  of  WB-RAN  countries,  on  the  average  accounting 

for  more  that  50%  of  the  quarterly  share.  Compared  to  refusals  at  land 

borders,  refusals  of  Turkish nationals  at  air  borders  follow  a  less  seasonal 

pattern, indicating a fairly constant passenger flow. Refusals at land borders 

are  mainly  limited  to  the  Serbian-Bulgarian  border,  reflecting  the  annual 

holiday travel of Turkish nationals working in the EU.  

As  indicated  on  the  map,  Tirana  airport  stands  out  with  three  daily  flights. 

Considering the relationship between the number of regular passenger flow 

and the number of refusals,  Albania should record the  highest refusal rate 

for  Turkish  nationals.  However,  Croatia  ranked  first  with  38%  share  of  the 

total refusals in 2009 at air borders of the WB-RAN countries.  

In summary, Turkish migrants extensively use legal travel options to en-

ter  the  area  of  the  Western  Balkans  by  air.  Once  there,  they  use  public 

transport to travel by land. Irregular border-crossing into the EU is facili-

tated by small, flexible and adaptable criminal groups. Usually, migrants 

are split into groups of up to four persons. 

Weekly regular flights from Turkey to the Western Balkans 

Irregular  border-crossing  of  Turkish  nationals  in 
2009 

Source: Open sources  

Source: WB-RAN as of 15 May 2010 

PUBLIC 

23 

4.3.  Transiting flow by land 

As  described  in  the  Frontex  Annual  Risk  Analysis  2010,  the  current  global 

from Greece  

economic  crisis  and  the  linked  reduced  job  opportunities  in  the  EU  have  

significantly contributed to lower the numbers of irregular border-crossing at 

the external borders of the EU in 2009 (compared to 2008). At the Serbian-

Hungarian  border,  however,  detections  increased.  Secondary  movements 

from  Greece  to  other  European  countries  largely  explain  this  counter-

cyclical increase.  

Consequently, the size of the transiting flow is a function of the number of 

newly  arriving  irregular  migrants  in  Greece  (from  Turkey).  Most  of  the 

migrants detected there claim Afghan origins. 

Afghans—before reaching Greece  

Available  information  suggests  that  a  large  majority  of  migrants  from 

Afghanistan usually transits Iran, either directly or through Pakistan, before 

splitting into two main flows. One follows the land route via Iran and Turkey 

to Greece, while the other leads across the sea to the Gulf, via Oman or the 

United Arab Emirates. Those trying to reach Greece have a long-term stay 

in  mind,  while  the  second  group  is  likely  to  engage  in  a  yearly  circular 

migration pattern.  

In Turkey, facilitation networks compete in providing different transportation 

means  to  cross  into  Greece,  depending  on  the  amount  of  money  paid. 

Operational information indicates that Turkish cities of Izmir and Didim were 

(in  2009)  important  staging  areas  for  the  sea  crossing  to  Greece.  In  the 

beginning of 2010, a shift towards land borders has been observed. 

Afghans—the profile  

Most of Afghan irregular migrants detected in Greece or in the WB-RAN 

countries  tend  to  come  from  middle-income  background,  with  earning 

potential  in  Afghanistan  but  are  nevertheless  driven  by  aspiration  of 

higher wages in Europe. They are likely to have diaspora ties in Europe, 

both  when  it  comes  to  obtaining  information  prior  to  migration  and 

finding  work  upon  arrival.  When  in  Greece,  they  often  try  to  generate 

income  to  finance  their  migration  to  the  UK  or  other  final  destination 

country.    

PUBLIC 

24 

Exiting Greece 

Chart on the left shows that in 2009 most Afghan irregular migrant exited 

Greece through intra-Schengen flights, using false documents or on board 

Italy-bound ferries. Roughly one third has opted for the Balkan land route 

option, transiting the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Serbia 

before reaching Hungary. 

Detections  of  Afghan  irregular  migrants    broken 

Detections  of  Afghan  nationals  at  the  Serbian-Hungarian  border  (on  both 

down by exit options, 2009 

sides)  became  significant  in  March  2009,  five  months  after  irregular  bor-

der-crossing of Afghans at the Greek-Turkish borders had peaked in Octo-

ber 2008. This in turn points to the amount of time spend in Greece before 

making  an  attempt  (or  multiple  attempts)  to  reach  other  EU  Member 

States. 

In  addition,  after  the  closure  of  the  Patras  camp  in  Greece  (July  2009), 

detection figures in Serbia and Hungary were rapidly increasing until Octo-
ber  2009,  clearly  indicating  a  so-called  “squeezing  balloon”  *or  displace-

ment effect. 

Source:  FRAN  and  WB-RAN  as  of  15  May  2010, 

Greek and Italian Ministry of Interior 

*This  effect  describes  what  happens  when  a  la 

latex balloon is squeezed: it will bulge elsewhere. 

In  the  context  of  the  Greek  the  “squeezing  bal-

loon”  means  the  following:  if  more  migrants  ar-

rive, more will have to leave Greece through the 

three main exits. So, if one exit (port of Patras) is 

significantly  affected,  the  other  one  (Western 

Balkans route) will have to balance out the differ-

ence. 

Make-shift camp for migrants in Patras 

g
r
o
.
r
c
h
n
u
:
e
c
r
u
o
S

PUBLIC 

25 

 
 
 
 
Detections of irregular border-crossing of  Afghans in 2009 

The Balkan route—modus operandi 

Operational  information  suggest  that  detected  Af-

ghans  usually  carry  handwritten  maps  showing  the 

detailed  route  from  Greece  to  Hungary  and  further 

to Austria or other Member States.  

Irregular  migrants  use  public  transport  and  often 

carry  important  amounts  of  money  sown  into  their 

clothing.  They  also  rely  on  small-time  operators, 

linked together in flat and unconsolidated networks. 

By definition, small operators face low threat to their 

businesses from competitors  and from law  enforce-

ment.  Moreover,  return  procedures  are  usually  not 

initiated,  reducing  further  return  risk  for  detected 

irregular migrants. 

The city of Bitola in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is believed 

to  be  the  first  main  gathering  point  after  irregularly  crossing  the  border 

between from Greece. Migrants usual stay close to the main transport route 

(Pan-European  corridor  10*)  and  continue  through  Bujanovac  (Presevo 

valley in Serbia) and Belgrade to finally reach Subotica, a city close to the 

border  with  Hungary.  There,  irregular  migrants  gather  into  groups  of  up  to 

20 persons and cross the green border into Hungary.  

Handwritten instructions found in Serbia 

r
o
i
r
e
t
n

I

i

f
o
y
r
t
s
i
n
M
n
a
i
b
r
e
S

:
e
c
r
u
o
S

26 

Source: FRAN and WB-RAN as of 15 May 2010 

*The Corridor 10 is one of several pan-European 

corridors. It runs between Salzburg in Austria and 

Thessaloniki  in  Greece.  The  corridor  passes 

through  Austria,  Slovenia,  Croatia,  Serbia,  the 

Former  Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia    and 

Greece. 

PUBLIC 

 
 
 
 
 
Main  characteristics  of  the  Western  Balkan  route,  from  the 

migrants’ perspective: 

1. Accessibility 

2. Limited need for higher-priced smuggling services  

3. Negligible financial investment 

4. Negligible law enforcement and return risk  

5. Multiple attempts  

False declaration of nationality (nationality swapping)* is, like in the case of 

Greece-Turkey  borders,  becoming  an  important  issue  affecting  the  transit 

route  from  Greece  and  Serbia  further  on  to  Hungary.  Detecting  and 

effectively  countering 

the  practice  of  nationality  swapping  requires 

specialised language/cultural analysis and debriefing techniques. 

*Nationality  swapping  is  a  practice  by  which 

migrants deliberately lie about their real national-

ity  and/or  prior  residence  in  order  to  frustrate 

return  procedures  after  illegal  border  crossing.  It 

also  allows  migrants  to  further  their  possible 

asylum  claim.  Often,  migrants  are  advised  to 

conceal  their  real  identify  and  country  of  origin 

either by facilitators or friends and family that had 

travelled the route before them.    

Frontex guest officers debriefing irregular migrants.  

x
e
t
n
o
r
F

:
o
t
o
h
P

27 

PUBLIC 

 
 
 
 
5.  Environmental 

scan 

Visa  liberalisation  for  Serbia,  the  Former  Yugoslav  Republic  of 

Macedonia and Montenegro 

New biometric passport holders from the three mentioned countries have 

been able to travel to the EU without visa obligation since 21 December 

2009.  Following  the  decision,  a  significant  increase  of  unsubstantiated 

asylum  claims  was  recorded  in  Belgium,  Germany,  the  Netherlands, 

Switzerland, Norway and Sweden. 

The  increase  was  largely  attributed  to  ethnic  Albanian  or  Roma 

community  members  from  Serbia  and  the  Former  Yugoslav  Republic  of 

Macedonia,  travelling  legally  to  the  mentioned  EU  Member  States    and 

citing socio-economical reasons for their asylum claims.  

Available  information  suggests  that  most  failed  asylum 

seekers  are  willing  to  return  home,  either  voluntarily  or  in 

accordance  with 

the  existing  readmission  agreements. 

Reports  from  Belgium  and  Serbia  indicate  that  at  least  500 

Serbian  failed  asylum  seekers  have  already  returned  from 

Belgium to Serbia. 

Similarly,  Norway  has  introduced  a  fast-track  procedure  (48 

hours)  and  has  forcefully  returned  78  failed  asylum  seekers 

in  March  2010  alone.  Following  the  return,  a  90%  weekly 

”
a
k
i
t
i
l

o
P

“

:
e
c
r
u
o
S

Failed asylum seekers from Serbia   waiting in front of Belgian 

decrease of asylum applications from Serbia and the Former 

asylum office 

Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was recorded in Norway.   

The  Government  of  the  Former  Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia   

publicly  addressed  the  issue  by  highlighting  negative  consequences  of 

unsubstantiated asylum claims. In addition, its border police strengthened 

exit  controls,  while  the  Ministry  of  Interior  initiated  investigations  into 

possible criminal involvement of travel agencies. 

Possible visa liberalisation for Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina   

Albania  and  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  have  made  progress  in  improving 

passport  security,  strengthening  border  controls, 

reinforcing 

the 

institutional framework to fight organised crime and corruption, as well as 

in external relations and fundamental rights. 

28 

PUBLIC 

 
 
 
In  April  2010  the  European  Commission  carried  out  a  thorough 

assessment  of  the  progress  achieved  by  Albania  and  Bosnia  and 

Herzegovina.  The  conclusions  allowed  the  Commission  to  propose  visa 

free  travel  for  the  two  countries.  The  proposal  entered  into  regular 

procedure at the end of May 2010. 

*For  Albania, 

the 

remaining  open 

benchmarks  relate  to:  the  development 

of  a  strategy  and  policy  to  support  the 

Both  countries  still  have  to  make  progresses  in  some  areas  where 

reintegration  of  Albanian  returnees;  the 

strengthening  of  capacities  of 

law 

enforcement 

authorities 

and 

the 

shortcomings  have  been  identified*.  The  European  Commission  will 

continue to monitor the efforts over the summer months of 2010 in order 

effective  implementation  of  the  legal 

to  allow  the  Council  and  the  Parliament  to  make  a  final  decision  in 

framework 

for 

the 

fight 

against 

organised 

crime 

and 

corruption, 

including 

through 

the  allocation  of 

adequate 

human 

and 

financial 

resources;  the  effective  implementation 

of the legal framework in the area of the 

confiscation of organised crime assets. 

autumn.  The  earliest  possible  date  is  most  likely  7  October  2010  (EU 

Justice  and  Home  Affairs  Council).  Regionally,  only  the  territory  of 

Kosovo remains excluded from the visa free package.  

Schengen enlargement 

For  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina, 

the 

Bulgaria  and  Romania  are  likely  to  become  parties  to  the  Schengen 

remaining  open  benchmarks  relate  to: 

the  strengthening  of  capacities  of  law 

enforcement 

and 

the 

effective 

implementation  of  the  legal  framework 

agreement  in  March  2011.  Thus,  the  area  of  free  travel  with  no  internal 

controls  will  expand  to  the  shores  of  the  Black  Sea,  making  the  two 

Member  States  more  attractive  for  irregular  migration  flows  transiting 

for the fight against organised crime and 

through Turkey. This eventuality should lead to a reduction of the transiting 

flow from Greece towards Hungary.   

corruption, 

including 

through 

the 

allocation  of  adequate  human  and 

financial 

resources; 

the  progressive 

implementation  of  the  action  plan  from 

March  2010  on  the  establishment  of 

electronic  data  exchange  between 

police  and  prosecution  bodies; 

the 

harmonisation  of  entity  level  and  Brcko 

district  criminal  codes  with  the  state-

level criminal code. 

29 

PUBLIC 

6.  Outlook 

6.1.  Albanian irregular  

migration 

The  Albanian  strategy  concerning  irregular  migration  is  characterised 

mainly  by  a  limited  need  for  planning  and/or  facilitation  of  irregular  entry, 

short  distances,  low  relative  costs  and  shorter  duration  of  migration 

(circularity). 

This  means  that  dismantling  facilitator  networks  is  not  a  particularly  valid 

strategy given the limited need for facilitation or the fact that facilitators are 

usually  local  residents.  Therefore,  the  economic  situation  in  Greece  and 

possible  visa  liberalisation  for  Albanian  and  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina 

citizens will likely impact the flow in the widest way. 

To  be  precise,  should  irregular  employment  opportunities  in  Greece  be 

substantially  reduced  in  the  context  of  the  current  political,  fiscal  and 

economic  situation  in  the  country,  the  irregular  flow  from  Albania  will 

temporarily  be  reduced.  It  is  however  difficult  to  estimate  the  size  of  this 

reduction. 

Possible  lifting  of  visa  requirements  to  travel  in  the  EU  could  bring  about 

significant  changes  affecting  the  patterns  of  Albanian  circular  migration. 

Specifically,  a  gradual  but  significant  reduction  of  irregular  border-crossing 

pressure at the Albanian-Greek border section is to be expected.  

Visa liberalisation could also affect refusals of entry at external land borders 

of  the  EU  for  Albanian  (and  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina)  nationals.  They  are 

likely  to  increase  in  Greece,  Slovenia,  Italy  and  Hungary,  mainly  as  the 

consequence of the increased regular passengers flow. 

The  Albanian  Government  has  already  started  an  information  campaign, 

aimed at addressing the possible abuse of legal travel channels. By publicly 

raising the issue, it wants to avoid similar problems related to the abuse of 

asylum  procedures  as  witnessed  in  the  case  of  Serbia  and  the  Former 

Yugoslav  Republic  of  Macedonia  nationals.  In  addition,  the  Albanian 

Government is also raising awareness regarding the conditions and length 

of stay provisions. 

30 

PUBLIC 

6.2.   Transiting  flow  by  land 

The  transiting  flow  through  the  Balkan  route  should  be  mainly  viewed  in 

from Greece 

the  context  of  developments  at  the  Greek-Turkish  borders  (Eastern 

Mediterranean  route).  Additionally,  movements  of  migrants  leaving 

Greece by air or ferry should also be taken into consideration when trying 

to estimate the future behaviour of the mentioned flow. 

A combination of reduced job opportunities in the EU and effective return 

policy  or  police  cooperation  with  transit  countries  in  Africa  (Libya, 

Senegal,  and  Mauritania)  has  significantly 

increased 

the  relative 

importance  of  the  Eastern  Mediterranean  route.  Elsewhere  in  the  EU 

arrivals have dropped considerably; In Italy (Central Mediterranean route) 

from 4,500 in the first quarter of 2009 to 147 in the same period of 2010 

and  in  Canary  Islands  (Western  African  Route)  from  1,400  in  the  first 

three months of 2009 to no arrivals in 2010. 

In the absence of effective return policy and operational cooperation with 

Turkey,  the  Eastern  Mediterranean  route  is  now  the  single  largest  entry 

point  into  the  EU  for  non-European  irregular  migrants.  This  has  and  will 

continue  to  have  a  direct  effect  on  the  Balkan  transiting  route,  both  in 

terms of the size and the composition of future transiting flow. 

Therefore,  the  composition  of  irregular  migration  flow  along  the  Balkan 

route will largely correspond to the changes of the flow at Greek-Turkish 

border.  Likewise,  it  will  increasingly  be  affected  by  the  issue  of  false 

declarations of nationality. Related difficulties with identifying countries of 

origins  are  likely  to  expose  additional  vulnerabilities  related  to  return 

procedures. Partial displacement towards Croatia and Slovenia is likely. 

PUBLIC 

31 

European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation 
at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union 

PUBLIC 

Rondo ONZ 1 00-124 Warsaw 

Poland 

ISBN 978-92-9471-010-9   

ISSN 2363-1023   

doi:10.2819/958576 

 TT-AD-10-001-EN-N