Trump officials urge nations to join effort to restrict asylum system at U.N. General Assembly

The Trump administration on Thursday pitched several countries at the United Nations General Assembly to join a plan to overhaul the global system for seeking asylum, arguing it has been abused and must be scaled back. Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau led the discussion on the sidelines of the General Assembly, alongside representatives from Kosovo, Bangladesh, Liberia and Panama, as Washington weighs a potential revamp of asylum policy that would stretch far beyond the United States. Landau said the gathering was meant to gauge early support for a sweeping shift in nearly 80 years of policy. "If you have hundreds of thousands of fake asylum seekers, then what happens to the real asylum system?" he said in opening remarks. "Saying the process is susceptible to abuse is not xenophobic; it is not being a mean or bad person."

The United States presented a framework in which asylum would be treated as a temporary status rather than a permanent pathway, with the implication that those seeking protection should eventually return home when conditions allow. U.S. officials emphasized that there is no right to receive asylum in a country of one’s choosing and that decisions are guided by each independent nation rather than by multinational organizations. The proposals drew an immediate mix of interest and concern among diplomats, human rights advocates and international officials.

Human rights groups watched from the sidelines with unease. Bill Frelick, Human Rights Watch’s director of refugee and migrant rights, said the U.S. proposal "looks like the first step in a bid to tear down the global refugee system." He faulted the plan for not embracing a core principle of the current system—that people should not be sent to countries where they face persecution. Filippo Grandi, the U.N. refugee chief, sat in the audience as world leaders on the panel applauded the Trump administration’s controversial approach to asylum and migration. Grandi, whose organization advocates for those in forced displacement, used the Q&A portion of the event to plead with Landau to take advantage of organizations like his as the U.S. moves forward with this shift in policy. "The right to seek asylum, which my organization upholds, is not incompatible with sovereignty," Grandi said to the panel. He added that instead of rushing to halt the global asylum process, "the key is to address the root causes" that force people to flee in the first place.

The United States has been the top destination for asylum-seekers by far since 2017, with Germany a distant second, according to 2024 figures from the U.N. refugee agency. President Donald Trump and his allies have argued that people with weak cases have exploited the system to gain entry to the United States, obtaining work permits while their cases wind through backlogged immigration courts. The United States adheres to the global asylum framework first laid out in the 1951 Refugee Convention and enshrined in U.S. law in 1980. People seeking refuge in the United States are able to apply for asylum once they are on American soil, regardless of whether they entered legally. To qualify, they must show a fear of persecution in their own country because of characteristics such as race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion. Refugees meet a similar standard by applying abroad.

Kosovo’s president, Vjosa Osmani Sadriu, spoke at the session about her own refugee experience and argued that real asylum seekers are being undermined by loopholes that allow illicit migration to flourish. "We all came to the conclusion that illegal migration 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 discussion comes as the number of people arriving at the U.S.–Mexico border seeking asylum has surged in recent years, straining immigration courts and fueling criticism that the system has been exploited by those seeking jobs or other non-persecutory reasons. Immigrant advocates have sued to block or roll back various policy shifts, and the issue remains before the courts. In recent years, the Biden administration has taken steps that critics say have severely curtailed asylum access, even as it has faced pressure to respond to the humanitarian crisis at the border. The administration’s approach contrasts with the more sweeping, border-centric stance taken by the previous administration, which framed the border as an invasion and suspended certain protections as a matter of national sovereignty.

Observers say Thursday’s conversations, while focused on what the United States calls a necessary reform, reflect a broader global debate about the balance between national sovereignty and international obligations. The U.S. plan signals a shift toward stricter visa-like controls for people seeking asylum and a greater emphasis on temporary protections rather than a guaranteed, long-term pathway to residency or citizenship. Proponents argue that such a framework could curb abuse and reduce backlogs, while critics warn it could siphon away protections for people fleeing persecution and expose vulnerable individuals to refoulement.

Despite the skepticism, the event established a platform for ongoing dialogue within the international community at a moment when migration remains a central issue for many governments. The U.S. has signaled that it intends to push for a reform agenda that could redefine how asylum is granted and verified, and that effort may hinge on securing broad international support from countries that are themselves facing migration pressures.

As the U.N. agency and human rights groups called for careful implementation and a focus on root causes, the question remains whether enough nations will endorse a framework that limits asylum in favor of temporary protections. The discussions at the General Assembly illustrate how a policy debate once defined by domestic concerns now carries the weight of international diplomacy and the potential to reshape the world’s oldest asylum system.