EES faces delays and scrutiny over Russian involvement
The European Union’s Entry/Exit System (EES) is a forthcoming digital border management initiative designed to enhance the monitoring of non-EU nationals entering and exiting the Schengen Area. By automating the collection of traveler information, including biometric data, the EES aims to bolster security, streamline border crossings, and accurately track overstays. However, the implementation of this system has encountered significant delays, with recent investigations highlighting the involvement of Russian entities as a contributing factor.
Understanding the Entry/Exit System (EES)
The EES is set to modernize the EU’s external border controls by replacing manual passport stamping with an automated system that records the entry and exit of third-country nationals. This system will collect personal information, travel documents, and biometric data such as fingerprints and facial images. The primary objectives are to improve the efficiency of border checks, prevent identity fraud, and ensure accurate detection of individuals who overstay their permitted duration in the Schengen Area. Initially slated for deployment in 2022, the EES has faced multiple postponements, with the latest projections indicating a launch in October 2025.
Delays and the Russian Connection
Recent reports have shed light on the role of Russian-linked entities in the delays plaguing the EES implementation. A notable investigation revealed that the Russian branch of Atos, a French IT company contracted to develop the EES software, has been implicated in these setbacks. European prosecutors are scrutinizing how Atos’s Moscow office procured software for this sensitive project, raising concerns about potential security vulnerabilities and the involvement of Russian intelligence services.
The investigation uncovered that personnel in Moscow purchased software under a license that might have granted access to Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB). While no formal charges have been filed, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is actively examining the case. EU-Lisa, the agency responsible for managing large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security, and justice, has implemented security measures and reported no identified breaches to date. Nevertheless, the involvement of Russian personnel in such a critical EU infrastructure project has intensified apprehensions regarding potential espionage and data security risks.
Broader Security Concerns
The delays in the EES rollout occur against a backdrop of escalating security concerns related to Russian activities within the EU. In 2023, Schengen zone countries issued nearly 450,000 visas to Russian citizens, a significant decrease from previous years but still a substantial number. Ylva Johansson, the EU’s migration and home affairs commissioner, has voiced apprehensions about these visas, particularly in light of increasing incidents of sabotage and espionage attributed to Russian operatives. Johansson has suggested that the EU’s visa guidelines for Russian nationals may require further tightening to mitigate security risks.
Additionally, the EU has authorized member states on its eastern flank to temporarily suspend asylum rights when faced with migrants allegedly “weaponized” by Russia and Belarus. This measure allows countries like Poland to halt asylum applications for up to 60 days in response to migration pressures believed to be orchestrated by these neighboring nations. The influx of migrants at the EU’s eastern borders has surged by 66% compared to the previous year, with accusations that Russia and Belarus are facilitating these movements to destabilize the region.
Implications and Future Outlook
The intertwining of Russian involvement in the EES delays and broader security concerns underscores the complex challenges the EU faces in safeguarding its borders and infrastructure. The reliance on external contractors with potential ties to adversarial nations highlights vulnerabilities in critical projects, necessitating more stringent oversight and security protocols.
Moving forward, the EU must address these challenges by enhancing vetting processes for contractors, investing in domestic technological capabilities, and fostering greater collaboration among member states to ensure the integrity and security of border management systems. The successful implementation of the EES is pivotal not only for improving border efficiency but also for reinforcing the EU’s commitment to security and the protection of its citizens.
In conclusion, while the EES promises significant advancements in the EU’s border management capabilities, the delays attributed to Russian involvement serve as a cautionary tale about the importance of vigilance and resilience in the face of geopolitical complexities. Addressing these issues head-on will be crucial for the EU to realize the full potential of the EES and uphold the safety and security of the Schengen Area.