The first ten weeks of Donald Trump’s presidency have created unprecedented geopolitical turmoil. The Trump Administration is ‘flooding the zone’ with new executive orders coming out of the White House almost on a daily basis, further shaking the existing world order.
The world is in flux, with seismic geopolitical shifts occurring and reshaping global dynamics. This article provides reflections on the potential migration implications of current events as they unfold. The purpose of the article is not to predict what will happen decisively, but to explore potential scenarios about what could happen, and to ultimately increase policy and response preparedness.
Ukraine
The threat to stop all military support to Kiev and the separate negotiations of the Trump Administration with both parties are likely to have a profound impact on the war in Ukraine and its mixed migration consequences.
If Ukraine falls completely, there are estimates of a further 20 million refugees fleeing to Western Europe. Despite an initially generous reception of millions of Ukrainian refugees across European countries, fatigue has started to develop and the EU keeps on extending the temporary protection directive for only 1 year at a time.
On the other hand, some kind of peace deal and stability in large parts of Ukraine could also trigger relatively large-scale return movements, especially if combined with massive investments in economic recovery and rebuilding infrastructure, which would provide considerable opportunities. It could also mean the EU would end the temporary protection for Ukrainians, just as Trump already announced the temporary protection for about 200,000 Ukrainians in the US is ending, which might force people to return prematurely.
One thing to keep in mind in such a return scenario is what it would mean for the labour market in Europe, with millions of Ukrainians currently filling jobs in labour markets that, generally across Europe face severe labour market shortages.
Horn of Africa
The war in Sudan has been raging on since April 2023 displacing more 10 million people within Sudan and across borders. South Sudan is potentially descending into another civil war. And there are increasingly alarming signals about a looming war between Eritrea and Ethiopia. In the case of Eritrea and Ethiopia, some observers reported that the US absence is taking a toll, as they would normally be far more engaged in trying to avoid further escalation.
All of this means there is significant potential for even further destabilisation in an already very unstable region which is likely to add to even further mass displacement within the region. However, we should be careful in assuming an automatic link between further displacement within the region and large-scale onward migration out of the region and towards Europe (see also below).
But with Eritreans, Ethiopians and Sudanese all having strong diaspora links in Europe, in such a scenario there will certainly be more movements towards North Africa and Europe. And, with the European-supported efforts to contain migrants in North Africa and knowing the situation many migrants find themselves in, in for example Libya and Tunisia, this also means potential for even further human rights violations of migrants.
Middle East
So far, about a million Syrians – IDPs within Syria and refugees from outside Syria – have returned home after the fall of the Assad-regime. However, many Syrians remain deeply sceptical of the stability and capacity of the new government to ensure safety, justice and basic services. Continued tensions and localised violence across several parts of Syria will likely slow or even stop returns completely, and even lead again to refugee movements out of Syria. Additionally, to support Syria to rebuild and to boost confidence of Syrians abroad in the future of their country, significant investment is needed, but with the massive reductions in foreign aid (see below) the required investment levels are unlikely to be met.
Emboldened by increased support from the new US administration, attacks by Israel on Gaza are escalating again, resulting in large numbers of civilian deaths and casualties. However, most Palestinians in Gaza remain displaced and trapped within Gaza and even if they would want to leave, have no way out, so this is unlikely to lead to refugee movements within the region or beyond. Tensions between Israel and Hezbollah also remain high. Despite ceasefire efforts, which both sides have accused each other of violating, Israel again bombed Beirut in late March, and is yet to fully withdrawn troops from its territory, citing Hezbollah’s failure to retreat. Trump’s strong support for Israel may impede rather than promote peace and stability in the region.
Another big question is what is going to happen with Iran in relation to Israel and the US. Pressuring Iran into discussing and signing a nuclear deal, Trump in recent days threatened to bomb Iran and strategically positioned six of the US strongest bomber aircrafts at a US military base in the Indian Ocean. However, if the proxy war with Iran will still primarily be fought in Yemen, with the Houthis, it would mainly lead to internal displacement within Yemen, as even after a decade of civil war in Yemen, relatively small numbers of Yemenis have fled their country, let alone the region. But if it would escalate into a full-scale war with Iran, we would likely be looking at a scenario of mass displacement within and beyond the region.
The current domestic unrest in Türkiye is potentially also related to the geopolitical situation. President Erdogan would be aware that Europe, and NATO, want Türkiye on their side more than ever. Which potentially means Erdogan has more leeway to crack down on the opposition domestically without too much concern raised by European countries and the EU. Europe also remains very much dependent on Turkish cooperation for migration control to keep the numbers on the Eastern Mediterranean route low. However, in 2023, there were 100,000 Turkish asylum applications in the EU, one of the biggest groups. It dropped again in 2024, but it shows there is considerable potential for large numbers of Turks fleeing to Europe if the political situation becomes worse in Türkiye.
US Foreign Aid cuts
The impact of the massive and sudden cuts in foreign aid and the terminations of grants worth billions of dollars is undeniably huge and is sending shockwaves through the development and humanitarian sectors. The New York Times estimated that millions of people might die as a result. Poverty will increase. Far fewer people who are affected and uprooted by conflict around the world will be reached with humanitarian assistance. On top of this, several European donors, such as the UK, Netherlands, France, Germany, Belgium and Switzerland are also decreasing foreign aid, often as a direct result of the need to massively increase their military expenditures.
In some recent articles it has been suggested this could all lead to an increase in migration and asylum seekers in Europe. But we may have to be careful in assuming such a direct link. The most vulnerable people, the poorest people, those hardest hit by the cuts in foreign aid, do generally not have the resources to migrate long distances to Western countries, such as those in Europe. So, while it is safe to assume that what is happening will have an impact on internal short-distance displacement and refugee movements within countries and regions, it is less likely we will see an immediate impact on migration all the way to the West.
Development funding as it is, despite the popular framing around addressing the so-called root causes, does generally not have a huge effect on the drivers of irregular migration. Which means that cutting development aid, is also unlikely to have a big effect. If anything, it might actually reduce people’s ability to migrate as they become poorer.
A related point is the impact of the foreign aid cuts on the multilateral system and the various UN agencies, not least the two most involved in migration governance – IOM and UNHCR. According to the Migration Policy Institute, in total 2.3 billion USD in migration-related aid was terminated by the US, and both UNHCR and IOM are facing severe budget cuts. While, as with everything these days, it is too early to say, it is likely the budget cuts will have an impact in terms of their capacity for migration management.
Climate change
Not just with the US, but in general, there seems to be a backtracking on commitments and budgets for climate action. This will have an impact, but it would be a long-term impact. And in general, with climate change and environmental impacts on mobility, the impact is primarily on short-distance, within-country or within-region displacement, and far less on longer distance international migration.
Latin America
The most direct and immediate migration impacts of the actions by the Trump Administration are obviously happening in the Latin American region. Suspending refugee resettlement, ending access to asylum at the Southern border, increasing arrests and deportations, terminating temporary protection and humanitarian parole for hundreds of thousands of people in the US, new agreements with third countries in the region to accept nationals and non-nationals deported from the US; the list of recent changes is endless. These various policies implemented by the Trump administration have profoundly disrupted migration dynamics that had been unfolding in the region for years, effectively reversing long-standing trends. Faced with increasing restrictions on regular migration to the U.S. and growing fears of deportation, many migrants are no longer heading north. In some cases, those already in Central or North America have even begun returning southward. Apprehensions at the US Southern border are at the lowest since the 1960s. The number of people crossing the Darien Gap between Colombia and Panama is the lowest since 2020. More and more people are stuck in Mexico and applying for asylum there, while many organisations in Mexico now lack the funding to support due to cuts in US foreign aid.
None of these developments, however, truly affect the existing drivers of migration in the region. On the contrary, cuts in development funding (at least 200 million USD aimed at deterring irregular migration from Central America was cut by the US); trade tariffs that might hurt businesses in the region exporting to the US – and thus undermine job opportunities in the region – as well as a possible pull for migrant labour from the US (see below), will all exacerbate existing migration drivers.
In general, wherever there is a strong demand among migrants to move, smugglers will be ready to satisfy that demand. While the immediate impact now seems to be an unprecedented drop in numbers and reversal of movements, smugglers are likely to adapt to the new reality and find new ways of circumventing restrictions. This often leads to more dangerous and more expensive journeys, and higher profits and a higher level of organisation among smugglers. In the case of the Americas region, this could possibly also lead to more involvement in the migrant smuggling business from highly organised and violent drug cartels who will consider it an increasingly lucrative trade.
Economic crisis and cost of living
The Trump Administration is single-handedly destroying the post-war economic world order. The announcement of trade tariffs for nearly all countries in the world – even though now paused for many – is creating a global trade war and stock markets are plummeting seeing the worst drops in decades. A global recession is looming, and the inflation and the cost of living will massively increase for many people around the world. Already before all of this, the cost of living has been a major concern for many leading to strong public discontent. Certain politicians have been conveniently capitalising on this discontent by scapegoating migrants and migration, creating a link between cost of living concerns and anti-migration sentiments. This is one of the issues behind the rise of anti-migration, far-right populist parties across in many countries in the global north. Further increases in the cost of living could, as such, lead to further tensions over the issue of migration and even harsher anti-migration policies, with severe consequences on the lives of migrants and refugees.
Interestingly, one of the ideas behind the trade tariffs is to boost the domestic industry and manufacture products domestically rather than import from countries where they are currently produced at a lower cost. However, such a protectionist approach will be at odds with an anti-migration approach. The industry will need labourers which are in short supply in many ageing societies and in the US. Rather than off- or near-shoring industries to countries of origin of migrants, to boost local economies and reduce migration (bring the work to the migrants), industries in destination countries will be increasingly in need of migrant labour. In short: this approach could inadvertently boost labour migration.
Politics
Something very interesting is happening in several countries since Trump took office, namely a shift back to the political centre, away from the far-right and populist parties. The Liberals in Canada, who were behind the Conservatives in the polls before Trump took office, are now leading again in the polls. The European Union is scoring the highest approval rates among European citizens ever recorded. The importance people attach to the topic of migration and asylum is rapidly dropping in many countries, because with the very real threat of Russia and the loss of the US as an ally, people are suddenly far more concerned about safety. They might realise that in times like this, you better rely on stable, moderate and pro-European leaders. The recently imposed trade tariffs on Europe will even further add to this development. So potentially, and probably quite contrary to his intentions, it seems that Trump, rather than a boost, might be a big blow to some of the far-right populist parties, which to a large extent campaign on anti-migration agenda’s. Of course it is hard to say if this trend will last – not least with the looming economic crisis as discussed above – but, to end on a positive note: this might help to bring the migration debate and migration policy making into calmer waters and pave the way for a more rational approach.
