‘Brutal manifestation of Western imperialism’: Backlash in Rwanda over UK asylum seeker deal

By Anadolu staff

KIGALI, Rwanda (AA) - As the UK pushes forward with its much-criticized move to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda, experts in the East African nation say the plan is “ethically questionable” and yet “another brutal manifestation of Western neo-colonialism and imperialism.”

“The approach adopted is ill-advised. Personally, I think this deal is ethically questionable on many levels,” Louis Gitinywa, a Rwanda-based political analyst told Anadolu.

“Also, this is again another brutal manifestation of Western neo-colonialism and imperialism because I don’t understand why poor countries of the Global South like Rwanda should bear the heavy cost of hosting migrants.”

Most of these people are “fleeing social and political troubles in their home countries ... (so) I think this is an oxymoron,” he added.

Britain first struck the controversial migration deal with Rwanda in April 2022 to send migrants who arrive in the UK across the English Channel to the East African country, where their asylum claims would be processed.

Reports indicate the UK has made a £240 million ($300 million) payment to facilitate the implementation of the five-year agreement with Rwanda.

Britain’s Home Secretary James Cleverly and Rwandan Foreign Minister Vincent Biruta signed a new treaty last December in Kigali to unblock a decision of Britain’s Supreme Court, which had deemed the plan unlawful.

Rwandan lawmakers earlier this year approved the new treaty, under which Rwanda will establish a special court to address cases and legal matters concerning refugees and asylum seekers.

This past Monday, British lawmakers passed the Safety of Rwanda Bill to address the Supreme Court’s concerns, paving the way for it to become law.

- ‘Always a cost’

Gitinywa, a human rights lawyer, believes there will be downsides for Rwanda in the deal.

“Honestly, there is always a cost with hosting refugees or migrants and asylum seekers, especially on access to public services such as health care, housing and education, as well as natural resources such as land and water,” he said.

He warned that hosting such a large number of people will likely take a heavy toll on Rwanda’s “weak and underfunded public services.”

There is also pushback in Rwanda from political forces, particularly the opposition Democratic Green Party of Rwanda, which voted against the treaty and remains opposed to the entire agreement.

Frank Habineza, the party’s president and a lawmaker, said its main demand “now is that all the fundamental human rights and procedures should be respected.”

The party believes that rich nations such as the UK should fulfill their international obligation to host refugees and not transfer them to third countries, he said.

Formally called the Rwanda-UK Migration and Economic Development Partnership Initiative, the deal has faced criticism from activists and rights groups around the world.

Two UN leaders on Monday expressed their concerns, warning of “the harmful impact it will have on global responsibility-sharing, human rights and refugee protection.”

Filippo Grandi, the UN high commissioner for refugees, and Volker Turk, the UN high commissioner for human rights, called on the UK government to reconsider its plan and instead “take practical measures to address irregular flows of refugees and migrants, based on international cooperation and respect for international human rights law.”

- ‘Rwanda is ready’

The Rwandan government, however, says the partnership reflects the country’s “commitment to protecting vulnerable people.”

Yolande Makolo, a government spokesperson, told Anadolu that Kigali has been prepared to receive asylum seekers from the UK since the moment the deal was agreed two years ago.

“However, because of some concerns expressed by UK courts, which Rwanda didn’t agree with, we have introduced new procedures to further enhance the asylum system. All these additional mechanisms are now in place and Rwanda is fully compliant with its obligations,” she said.

“We look forward to welcoming the migrants and providing them with a safe and dignified environment when they arrive.”

Courts in the UK initially demanded that more protections are needed for people who would be sent to Rwanda.

Government officials, however, argue that Rwanda has a long track record of providing safety to refugees, with the country already hosting thousands of people who have fled conflict.

On safety concerns for asylum seekers in Rwanda, Makolo said the government has worked hard over the last 30 years to make the country safe “for Rwandans and non-Rwandans alike.”

“This is why we are able to offer safety to the over 130,000 refugees already in Rwanda, and why we partner with the UNHCR to bring migrants stuck in Libya to safety in our country,” she said.

“We are committed to the Migration and Economic Development Partnership with the UK and look forward to welcoming those relocated to Rwanda.”

Makolo dismissed as “nonsense” claims that Rwandan authorities have suppressed voices critical of the agreement.

“You only need to look at the coverage of the partnership to see the range of views being freely expressed by Rwandan voices,” she said.

The government has set up hostels in the capital Kigali to house people transferred from the UK, saying that those who want to leave Rwanda will be supported in returning to their country of origin or relocating to a third country.