President Donald Trump’s latest address to the United Nations General Assembly this week set off a firestorm of debate across Europe and the United States, as he accused European leaders of failing to stem irregular migration and called for a sweeping overhaul of the global asylum system. But a closer look at the facts, as reported by the Associated Press and other sources, reveals a much more nuanced—and at times contradictory—picture than the one painted by the president and his administration.
On September 24, 2025, Trump took the podium at the UN in New York and didn’t mince words. “Europe is in serious trouble. They’ve been invaded by a force of illegal aliens like nobody’s ever seen before,” he declared, warning that European societies were being “destroyed.” The president’s rhetoric was pointed and urgent, echoing the hardline themes that have defined his second term in office. Yet, according to data from the EU’s border control agency, Frontex, irregular border crossings into Europe from January through August 2025 were actually down around 20% compared to the same period the previous year—about 112,000 people were flagged, as opposed to nearly 140,000 in 2024. These figures suggest that, contrary to Trump’s claims, the so-called “invasion” is in fact receding.
It’s not just crossings that are dropping. Asylum applications in EU countries fell by 13% in 2024, with just over 900,000 people applying, according to EU data. That’s a far cry from the peak in 2015, when 1.2 million asylum requests were lodged as people fled conflicts like Syria’s civil war. “Unauthorized immigration has weighed heavily on European politics since 2015,” the Associated Press notes, but the numbers have been moving in the opposite direction of Trump’s warnings for several years now.
Still, the president’s comments reflect an anxiety that continues to shape political discourse on both sides of the Atlantic. Trump’s speech was only one part of a broader campaign by his administration to reshape global migration policy. The following day, Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau led a panel at the UN titled “Global Refugee Asylum System: What Went Wrong and How to Fix It.” Representatives from Kosovo, Bangladesh, Liberia, and Panama joined the discussion, which aimed to build support for a dramatic rethinking of asylum as it has existed since World War II.
Landau argued that the asylum system is “susceptible to abuse” and called for significant restrictions. “If you have hundreds of thousands of fake asylum seekers, then what happens to the real asylum system?” he asked. “Saying the process is susceptible to abuse is not xenophobic; it is not being a mean or bad person.” The Trump administration’s proposal would turn asylum into a temporary status, with claimants expected to return home eventually, and emphasized that there’s no inherent right to seek asylum in a country of one’s choosing.
But these proposals have drawn sharp criticism from human rights groups and international officials. Bill Frelick, director of refugee and migrant rights at Human Rights Watch, warned that the U.S. plan “looks like the first step in a bid to tear down the global refugee system.” Filippo Grandi, the U.N. refugee chief, who attended the panel, responded, “The right to seek asylum, which my organization upholds, is not incompatible with sovereignty.” Grandi urged the U.S. and others to address the root causes that force people to flee, rather than dismantling the system meant to protect them.
The U.S. has long been the world’s top destination for asylum seekers, with Germany a distant second, according to U.N. figures from 2024. Under current U.S. law, enshrined in the 1980 Refugee Act, people can apply for asylum once they are on American soil if they fear persecution based on race, religion, nationality, social group, or political opinion. If granted, asylum offers a permanent future: the right to work, bring family, apply for residency, and eventually seek citizenship.
Trump’s administration, however, has sought to tighten these rules at every turn. On his first day back in office in January 2025, Trump invoked the Immigration and Nationality Act to restrict asylum at the southern border, calling the situation an “invasion.” But in July, federal courts pushed back, ruling that the president could not bar asylum claims or block approved refugees under a broader travel ban, explaining that Congress—not the president—sets asylum policy. Despite these legal setbacks, Trump’s message has resonated with some leaders abroad, particularly those facing their own domestic pressures over migration.
Europe’s challenges are far from over. Every year, more than 400,000 foreign nationals are ordered to leave the EU, but only about 20% are actually deported, according to the European Commission. Geographic and bureaucratic hurdles make removals difficult, and countries vary widely in their willingness to cooperate. Chris Borowski, a Frontex spokesperson, explained, “Geography adds to the challenge. People don’t go to one place. They go to dozens of countries, all with different levels of cooperation and different political realities. And not every country is very open to take its citizens back.”
Trump also cited high numbers of foreign-born inmates in European prisons as evidence of migration’s negative impact. He claimed that nearly half of inmates in Germany, Austria, Greece, and Switzerland were foreign nationals. The facts are a bit more complicated: in Germany, the figure is 37%, not 50%, while in Austria and Switzerland, the numbers are closer to Trump’s claims—about 48% and nearly 73%, respectively. Femke van der Meulen, founder of Prison Watch, noted that foreigners are more likely to be detained due to increased risk of detection and lack of stable housing, not necessarily higher rates of criminality.
In another controversial moment, Trump accused London’s mayor, Sadiq Khan, of wanting to implement Sharia law—a claim Khan firmly denied. “I’m a Muslim mayor who leads a liberal, multicultural, progressive, successful city,” Khan told Sky News, emphasizing that British law remains supreme and that religious councils, whether Muslim or Jewish, have no authority over the legal system.
Not everyone at the UN panel was critical of the Trump administration’s approach. Kosovo’s president, Vjosa Osmani Sadriu, who has her own refugee background, spoke in support of targeting illegal migration to protect the integrity of asylum for those truly in need. “We all came to the conclusion is that it is the illegal migration that must be challenged in order to protect and preserve the integrity of those who are real asylum seekers, of those who are legal citizens and those who respect the rules and respect the law,” she said.
The debate over asylum and migration is far from settled. As global displacement reaches historic highs, the tension between national sovereignty and humanitarian responsibility remains at the heart of policy battles in Washington, Brussels, and beyond. For now, the world watches as the U.S. pushes for change—and as courts, advocates, and other nations weigh in on the future of asylum.