Europe’s new border system keeps moving by switching off

Europe’s new biometric border regime was meant to modernise frontier controls and track non-EU visitors in real time. Instead, the Entry/Exit System is exposing a paradox of high-tech travel security: to keep passengers moving when terminals are overwhelmed, airports and border posts are increasingly reverting to old methods or partially switching the system off.

A data-heavy system meets peak-season reality

The European Union’s Entry/Exit System (EES) is designed to register non-EU travellers as they cross the external borders of the Schengen area, replacing passport stamps with a centralised database of biometric and biographic data. The system records each person’s entry and exit and automatically calculates when their authorised stay expires, a change intended to tighten migration control and close information gaps exposed over the past decade.

In practice, the first months of full operation have highlighted the gap between technical ambition and on-the-ground capacity. Biometric capture adds several minutes per passenger during initial registration, particularly for first-time visitors and families who must be processed together. Airports and ferry terminals that invested heavily in e-gates and kiosks have still struggled when multiple full flights arrive at once and only a limited number of border booths are staffed.

Reports from major holiday gateways describe queues stretching for hours when the system runs at full capacity, especially where staffing levels or terminal layouts have not been adapted for EES. In some regional airports, a wave of arrivals can quickly exceed what the biometric kiosks and border officers can handle, turning what was meant to be a fast, automated process into a bottleneck.

This strain is not confined to a few isolated sites. Airlines, airport associations and passenger groups across the continent have warned that unless capacity is better matched to demand, the combination of biometric checks and peak-season travel will continue to produce flashpoints of disruption.

Regulations build in ‘degraded mode’ and workarounds

Unlike many earlier border IT projects, EES has been rolled out with detailed contingency planning baked into European law. A 2025 regulation on the progressive start of operations sets out how member states can move in and out of what officials describe as “degraded mode,” allowing border posts to fall back on more traditional checks when the central system, local infrastructure or passenger volumes become unmanageable.

This framework recognises that the central database, national systems and biometric hardware will not always function perfectly or at the same speed. In degraded mode, border officers may temporarily stop enrolling fingerprints, switch off or bypass kiosks, or process travellers using manual passport inspection while later updating records. The intention is to avoid grounding flights or closing ferry ports when technology falters or queues reach unacceptable lengths.

Publicly available information from EU institutions shows that the regulation also anticipates failures of the central system or connectivity issues in individual countries. In those events, officers can continue to admit travellers while keeping paper or local electronic records that are synchronised once the central system is back online. This approach effectively trades some real-time accuracy for continuity of operations.

Critics argue that such derogations risk undermining the core promise of EES, which is to ensure consistent, automated recording of every entry and exit. Supporters counter that without these legal escape valves, border posts would face a stark choice between shutting down traffic and breaching the new rules.

On the ground, ‘off’ is becoming the default safety valve

While the legal texts speak in careful terms about progressive deployment and degraded modes, travellers are witnessing a more straightforward reality: when pressure builds, elements of EES are simply switched off. Accounts from airports in Italy, Portugal, Greece and elsewhere describe kiosks powered down, biometric enrolment quietly paused and passengers funnelled into conventional passport queues to keep lines from spilling through terminals.

In some locations, this has happened pre-emptively at the start of the summer season. Local authorities and airport operators, wary of reputational damage from images of stranded tourists, have chosen to suspend full EES checks for certain categories of travellers or at specific times of day. In others, the change is reactive: when queues exceed a threshold, staff abandon the kiosks and fall back on manual stamping until crowds subside.

This pattern has led some commentators to characterise EES as a system that functions by being turned off whenever it is most needed. The technology continues to operate at quieter times or in better-resourced hubs, but at precisely the moments when data on entries and exits would be most comprehensive, border posts revert to analogue methods. That dynamic raises questions about how complete and consistent the new database will be in its early years.

For travellers, the practical effect is unpredictability. Some report breezing through highly automated border zones in minutes, while others face multi-hour waits at airports where biometric lanes are shut and under-staffed manual lines bear the full load of summer traffic.

Airlines and airports push for a rethink of rollout

Industry groups representing European airports and airlines have pressed for a broader review of EES implementation, warning that the current approach risks repeating the same cycle each peak season. They argue that system design, staffing levels and passenger information were misaligned with the realities of leisure travel, where families, older travellers and infrequent flyers require more assistance at kiosks.

Carriers have raised concerns about missed connections, delayed departures and knock-on disruption across their networks when border queues swell without warning. Airports, in turn, point to limited control over border staffing and the pace at which national authorities upgrade booths, hire officers and fine-tune procedures for the new regime.

Published commentary from travel and aviation sectors suggests a growing consensus that the technology itself is only part of the challenge. Training, terminal design and clear communication to passengers about what to expect appear just as critical as the performance of the central database. Where investment in these supporting elements has lagged, operators have been more inclined to fall back on familiar manual processes.

The push for a review does not signal opposition to the goals of EES, which many industry voices accept as a predictable consequence of tighter border management. Rather, it reflects concern that, without adjustments, the system’s reputation with travellers may be defined by queues and outages rather than by efficiency or security.

Balancing security, data integrity and passenger experience

The current phase of EES highlights a broader tension at the heart of contemporary border policy. Policymakers seek more complete, real-time information on who is entering and leaving, in part to manage irregular migration and security risks. At the same time, tourism-dependent economies and transport operators need border crossings that feel seamless, particularly for repeat visitors from neighbouring regions.

Switching elements of the system off when overwhelmed is an attempt to reconcile these pressures. It preserves the flow of people and goods while limiting the risk of scenes that could deter visitors. Yet each such decision also creates gaps in the data that the system was built to capture, at least until procedures for backfilling records are fully tested and trusted.

How long this hybrid state persists will depend on several factors: the speed with which member states adapt staffing and infrastructure, the resilience of the central system under sustained high loads, and travellers’ tolerance for occasional disruption in exchange for heightened control. As these pieces fall into place, EES may begin to resemble the seamless digital border its designers envisaged.

For now, Europe’s new border system remains a work in progress, operating at full power on some days and at half-light or not at all on others. The coming peak travel seasons will determine whether the current pattern of switching off under pressure is a temporary crutch or a lasting feature of the Schengen area’s new digital frontier.