To not miss any African news, subscribe to the newsletter of “World Africa” from this link. Every Saturday at 6 a.m., find a week of news and debates covered by the editorial staff of the “World Africa”.
“We don’t trade in human beings. It is not possible, it would be contrary to our values. » Thus expressed Paul Kagame during the annual dinner of the diplomatic corps, organized at the end of April, in Kigali. The Rwandan president responded to the many criticisms raised by the signing, on April 14, of a memorandum of understanding providing for the deportation to Rwanda of asylum seekers who arrived illegally in the United Kingdom.
London thus hopes to discourage migrants from undertaking the Channel crossing and promises in return to support the Rwandan economy, in particular through an initial financing of 120 million pounds sterling (140 million euros).
We still know very little about this ” partnership “, whether on the criteria used by the British authorities to decide who will be sent to Kigali, on the number of asylum seekers who could be brought there by force. And, above all, on the motivations that may have pushed Rwanda, this country the size of Brittany and counting among the most densely populated in Africa, to engage in such a project.
While in the United Kingdom some NGOs have already announced that they want to take the text to court, Kigali is defending its decision. In a column published in the columns of Times, on April 18, British Home Secretary Priti Patel and Rwandan Foreign Minister Vincent Biruta presented the project as “an innovative solution” aimed at combating smuggling networks and migrant smuggling.
“Rwanda already hosts 130,000 refugees from various countries and, since 2019, has given refuge to migrants evacuated from Libya at the request of UNHCR [Haut Commissariat des Nations unies pour les réfugiés]. This demonstrates the country’s commitment to protecting vulnerable people around the world.”continues the text.
Page Contents
“More illegal migration”
For three years, the country has, in fact, welcomed more than 900 African asylum seekers evacuated from Libya by the UN agency. As part of this mechanism, called Emergency Transit Mechanism (ETM), the UN exfiltrates migrants from Libyan detention centers, where they suffer ill-treatment, and takes them into care in a center located in southern Rwanda, in awaiting the examination of their request for asylum by Western countries. One example among others of the policy of “African solutions to African problems” by Paul Kagame.
“But the ETM has nothing to do with the partnership signed between Rwanda and the United Kingdom”assures Larry Bottinick, UNHCR representative in London. “It’s a temporary solution whose primary purpose is not to keep refugees in Rwanda. » More than half of those who arrived in the country through this program left for Europe and Canada, where they were accepted with refugee status. None have, so far, taken the steps to settle in the “land of a thousand hills”, an option which is however offered to them within the framework of the ETM.
The memorandum of understanding signed between the United Kingdom and Rwanda provides for a one-way trip to Kigali, without the possibility of seeking asylum in London. And could concern mainly non-Africans. “Is an Iranian or an Iraqi with cousins in Europe really going to consider his future in Kigali?asks Mr. Bottinick. Israel has already tried to send refugees to Rwanda and this has created more illegal migration, since many of them then decided to return to the Mediterranean, through South Sudan, Sudan and Libya, which is a far more dangerous journey than crossing the English Channel. »
“Voluntary departures”
As early as 2014, an opaque agreement with Tel Aviv had already sparked controversy. Although the exact terms have always remained confidential, it has been established that Israel offered African asylum seekers the choice between being placed in detention and a trip, paid for, to two countries presented as safe: Uganda and Rwanda. According to the UNHCR, nearly 4,000 Eritreans and Sudanese have returned to Africa in what was described as “voluntary departures”between December 2013 and June 2017.
At the time, the International Refugee Rights Initiative strongly criticized the process. “By sending them to Uganda and Rwanda, the Israeli authorities are promising these asylum seekers that they will receive papers allowing them to stay in the country legally. But we found that they did not receive any documents on arrival and that they were, on the contrary, encouraged to leave these countries or to live there without legal status”explained the NGO in a report published in 2015.
Today, Kigali offers three solutions to migrants rejected by the United Kingdom: return to their country of origin, departure for a third country or regularization and settlement in Rwanda. To those who wish to stay, the government promises decent housing, access to social assistance and the country’s almost universal health insurance fund, as well as the right to work. All mainly funded by the United Kingdom.
“Kigali must be aware of the fact that few refugees will come to Rwanda and stay there. But the government was able to see in this agreement a financial opportunity, moreover in the form of budgetary aid. In this case, there is a lot of communication and a certain amount of cynicism on both sides.analyzes a source who follows Rwandan politics closely.
“Awesome political leverage”
The agreement also allows Rwanda, regularly singled out for its repression of the opposition and freedom of expression, to consolidate its image as a stable country and to position itself as a credible partner on international issues. The country is in discussion for a similar project with Denmark.
“This kind of agreement is a tremendous political lever for Paul Kagame in his future relationship with the United Kingdom and perhaps, tomorrow, with Denmark. He will be able to use it to support his country in various international bodies.explains Benjamin Augé, researcher at the French Institute of International Relations.
Kigali also has a card to play in terms of image: when signing the agreement, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson described Rwanda as “one of the safest countries in the world, internationally recognized for its reception and integration of migrants”. A speech radically different from that held by the United Kingdom in January 2021, during the review, by the UN, of the achievements in terms of respect for human rights in the member countries.
The British representative expressed concern about restrictions on press freedom in Rwanda and urged the authorities to investigate allegations of extrajudicial executions, deaths in custody, enforced disappearances and torture.
Despite the criticisms, Rwanda therefore wishes to present itself as a land of welcome. The country has also received, in recent months, a handful of Afghan refugees fleeing the Taliban regime. These are professors received in Kigali at the request of the United States Academy of Sciences and all the students and staff of a boarding school for girls.
It remains to be seen when the first planes of failed asylum seekers from the UK will land in Kigali. On Tuesday May 3, Mr Johnson’s spokesman announced that the program may not start for several months, citing likely legal challenges.
