Live

From Munich to a New Security Debate

Recent events in Munich sparked a fresh discussion about security. In mid-September, EU interior ministers met in the Bavarian capital for a so-called “hard migration summit.” Few expected that air defense would dominate the conversation.

Public reports highlighted how just two drone incidents within 24 hours paralyzed Munich Airport, affecting over 6,500 passengers. These events exposed a new type of threat: unauthorized drone flights that can disrupt transport and even endanger critical infrastructure.

In this context, EU Commissioner for Migration Magnus Brunner suggested expanding Frontex’s mandate to include drone defense. Speaking alongside Germany’s Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt, his proposal drew significant attention across European capitals.

From Border Protection to Air Security

Brunner acknowledged that drones had already appeared in EU internal security discussions last year, but recent events accelerated the debate. The European Commission announced plans to redirect part of its border program funding toward surveillance and anti-drone technologies.

In practice, this could mean that Frontex—traditionally focused on external border protection and migration operations—would gain new defensive powers. Brunner revealed that €150 million has already been allocated for drone technology, with another €250 million from the Border Management Fund earmarked specifically for detection, neutralization, and cross-border coordination systems.

This shift reflects a broader trend of militarizing civilian infrastructure in Europe, where the line between protection and defense is increasingly blurred. If airports and ports are classified as strategic sites, including Frontex in their protection seems logical. The key question is whether this will blur the distinction between a civilian agency and a military one.

Frontex as a New Pillar of EU Security

Brunner suggested that airport protection should become “part of Frontex’s future tasks.” He emphasized that critical infrastructure, including transport and energy networks, requires an integrated approach. “These resources can also be used more broadly,” he added.

Such a vision would fundamentally reshape Frontex’s role. The agency, long associated with border management and migration support, could become a tool of EU defense strategy—a sort of “civil-military guardian of borders and skies.”

Politically, this aligns with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s earlier promises to reform Frontex and strengthen its role in managing returns. While her remarks originally focused on migration, the new interpretation hints at much broader ambitions, including integrating the agency into Europe’s air defense architecture.

Mandate Risks and Legal Boundaries

However, some member states are cautious about expanding Frontex’s powers. EU Council notes show that discussions about the agency’s future are well advanced. Some capitals are even considering granting Frontex the authority to organize migrant transfers between non-EU countries—a move currently not allowed.

These proposals raise legal and proportionality concerns. Can an agency originally tasked with border support simultaneously take on air defense responsibilities? What democratic oversight mechanisms would govern its new powers?

Expanding Frontex’s mandate may require amendments to its founding regulation and new rules for cooperation between civilian and military security structures. Brussels must answer not only whether the expansion is necessary but also how to ensure it respects EU legal frameworks.

Border Defense or Citizen Control?

Including Frontex in drone defense could strengthen security but also raise concerns about fundamental rights. Drone detection and neutralization technologies often involve monitoring radio signals, video, or location data, creating the potential for excessive surveillance.

Under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, it will be crucial to ensure that Frontex’s measures remain proportional to the threat and do not infringe on citizens’ privacy. A drone can be a tool for safety—but also a symbol of oversight.

Opponents warn of a domino effect: if Frontex gains air defense powers, its involvement in domestic operations could follow, challenging its civilian mandate.

A Strategic Moment for the EU

The Council of the Interior is set to revisit Frontex’s mandate on 14 October during a debate on border security and critical infrastructure protection. This will be a key session ahead of the agency’s planned mandate review next year.

If approved, Frontex’s new role could make it a central instrument of Europe’s resilience against hybrid threats. It would also give the agency a much greater influence over internal security policy. In this sense, decisions about its future will test not only Brussels but the entire EU—gauging how ready the Union is to balance security with freedom.

Written by

Shape the conversation

Do you have anything to add to this story? Any ideas for interviews or angles we should explore? Let us know if you’d like to write a follow-up, a counterpoint, or share a similar story.

Write a counterargument article Write a related article