1. Introduction

Convicted murderer among three members of NZYQ cohort to be resettled in Nauru under deal struck by Labor(The Guardian 2025/2/15) describes measures to resettle Australian illegal immigrants in a third country (Nauru).

The influx of irregular immigrants and refugees poses significant political, economic, and social challenges for host countries. To alleviate domestic burdens while maintaining a humanitarian approach, some countries have adopted third-country resettlement programs. These programs relocate refugees and irregular immigrants to a third country instead of allowing them to settle in the host country. Often implemented in collaboration with international organizations and NGOs, these policies vary in execution and effectiveness. This paper explores notable case studies of third-country resettlement and examines their implications.

2. Australia’s “Pacific Solution”

Australia introduced the “Pacific Solution” as part of its efforts to curb irregular immigration and enforce strict refugee policies. Under this framework, asylum seekers attempting to enter Australia illegally were transported to offshore processing centers in Nauru and Manus Island in Papua New Guinea.

Key Features:

  • Prevents asylum seekers from applying for refugee status on Australian soil.
  • Transfers them to Nauru or Papua New Guinea for refugee status determination.
  • Recognized refugees are resettled in countries other than Australia, such as the United States.
  • Criticized internationally for inhumane treatment and poor detention conditions.

While this policy successfully deterred irregular immigration, concerns about human rights violations led to the gradual closure of offshore facilities. Nevertheless, Australia continues to enforce stringent immigration policies.

3. U.S. “Safe Third Country Agreement” with Guatemala

Under the Trump administration, the United States signed the “Safe Third Country Agreement” with Guatemala in 2019 to prevent Central American migrants from reaching the U.S. via Mexico.

Key Features:

  • Requires migrants from El Salvador and Honduras to seek asylum in Guatemala instead of the U.S.
  • Migrants attempting to apply for asylum in the U.S. are sent back to Guatemala.
  • Effectiveness questioned due to Guatemala’s weak social and economic infrastructure.

This policy faced heavy criticism as Guatemala lacked adequate resources to accommodate asylum seekers. The Biden administration later suspended the agreement and pursued alternative immigration policies.

4. European Union (EU) Cooperation with Libya and Turkey

To curb irregular migration across the Mediterranean, the EU has collaborated with Libya and Turkey.

(1) Cooperation with Libya

The EU has worked with Libya to prevent migrants from crossing the Mediterranean.

  • Provides funding to Libya’s coast guard to intercept migrant boats.
  • Critics highlight severe human rights violations in Libyan detention centers.
  • Some migrants are resettled through third-country programs.

(2) EU-Turkey Agreement

In 2016, the EU and Turkey signed the “EU-Turkey Agreement” to manage Syrian refugee flows.

  • Turkey agreed to stop migrant departures to Greece in exchange for EU financial aid.
  • The EU committed to resettling a portion of Syrian refugees directly from Turkey.
  • Turkey hosts millions of refugees but criticizes the EU for insufficient support.

5. Canada’s Third-Country Resettlement Program

Canada actively implements a third-country resettlement program based on humanitarian principles.

  • Works with UNHCR to resettle refugees recognized in third countries.
  • Has successfully resettled Syrian and Afghan refugees.
  • Local governments and civil organizations assist with social integration.

Canada’s approach is considered a model for balancing humanitarian responsibilities with structured resettlement.

6. Conclusion and Challenges

Third-country resettlement programs help alleviate the burden on receiving nations, but they also pose several challenges:

  1. Human Rights Concerns – Poor living conditions and rights violations in detention centers draw international criticism.
  2. Burden on Receiving Countries – Many third countries lack adequate infrastructure to support resettled immigrants.
  3. Sustainability of Policies – Political shifts can lead to abrupt policy changes or cancellations.

Countries must strike a balance between security and humanitarian considerations while ensuring fair responsibility-sharing. International cooperation remains crucial to making third-country resettlement a viable and ethical solution.

Japan Immigration News