Flaws in Britain-Rwanda Export Agreement: Implications for Migration Policy and Equal Partnership

The British Parliament this week approved the controversial export deal with Rwanda, which the governing Tories have long wanted. The party is hoping to somehow prevent its election defeat in the autumn – with a final, desperate appeasement for right-wing voters who want to be tougher on migrants.

Almost everything about this deal is bad. The treaty states that Britain can send illegal immigrants to Rwanda – regardless of where they are from. In the East African country, migrants should go through an asylum procedure according to local laws and, if necessary, obtain asylum or another residence permit. The British are transferring the equivalent of more than half a billion francs to Rwanda.

Many experts doubt whether migrants will be prevented from making their way to the UK – which is the aim of the deal. And it is not yet clear whether Rwanda will become the third safe country that the British government has declared to be under the law. But it must be to meet legal and moral standards. It is therefore unclear if and when flights will bring migrants to Rwanda.

Africa comes into focus

Nevertheless, these and similar ideas are already finding many imitators today. According to migration researcher Gerald Knaus, eighteen European countries are now considering conducting asylum procedures in third countries. The Federal Council recently agreed to study the project. And the National Council commission this week referred to a proposal by FDP State Councilor Petra Gössi, who wants asylum seekers from Eritrea to be deported to a third country – for example to Rwanda.

So Africa is moving to the focus of politics in Europe, in a new way. Is the idea of ​​dealing with migration increasingly used by African states as a neo-colonial way of thinking, as refugee groups and human rights activists complain? “The global north is already producing used clothes, poultry remains and the effects of climate change to the global south,” Austrian migration expert Judith Kohlenberger said this week. “And now the refugees too.”

Why not try new migration deals if done right? That is certainly better than accepting the death of thousands of people in the Mediterranean Sea.

Critics have a point. Britain in particular has a long and difficult history of moving people to countries they have no connection with. After Britain abolished slavery in its colonies in 1834, it had no free labor on its sugar plantations in the Caribbean. In the following decades they replaced the hundreds of thousands of Indians they transported there.

Nevertheless there is another reading of the latest developments – one that is very positive. An effort to deal more closely with the issue of migration with African states can lead to a new perspective on the continent of Europe. A perspective that African countries do not only see as recipients of development aid, but as partners on an equal footing. And on the other hand, migration agreements concluded in mutual interest can also strengthen African states in their dealings with Europe – increasing their autonomy and sovereignty.

That assumes a few things. It starts with European countries only working with states that meet certain constitutional conditions. It continues because they are very responsive to the needs and interests of African countries – they do not work like the colonial masters of yesteryear, but with respect and admiration.

In concrete terms, this means: African states that agree to participate in the re-entry of migrants or the implementation of asylum procedures should have access to European markets for their companies – and investments that are truly beneficial to the local economy.

Above all, African countries that are doing their part to limit irregular migration need more legal migration to Europe. Quotas, scholarships and easier visa rules are one way to do this. Switzerland’s existing migration partnerships with Nigeria and Tunisia can serve as a model for some of these measures – and can be expanded.

If all this is achieved, why not at least try to cooperate more closely with African countries (including in carrying out asylum procedures)? It is certainly better than accepting the death of thousands of people who are abandoned in the desert every year or who drown in the Mediterranean on their way to Europe. Whether it will succeed remains to be seen. But if he gets Europe to deal honestly with Africa, a lot has already been achieved.

Article from “»