More appearance than reality? – Why the Rwanda Pact could be a non-starter

How should Europe deal with irregular migration? The following solution is floating around in the think tanks of European governments: the entire asylum process should be outsourced to third countries. The aim is to reduce the burden on authorities, close irregular routes and deter smuggling gangs.

Savior Rwanda?
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak wants to fly migrants to Rwanda in East Africa, more than 6,000 kilometers away – regardless of their origin. An asylum application must then be submitted and processed in the dictatorially ruled country. Those who are accepted will be allowed to stay in Rwanda. Anyone who is rejected must be deported to a “safe third country”. Wherever he is. There are absolutely no plans to return to Britain. So far so (un)clear.

Chancellor Karl Nehammer believes his counterpart Sunak is on to something big. On Tuesday he praised the British ‘Rwandan model’ as a ‘pioneer’ for the European Union. During the British Prime Minister’s visit to Vienna, Nehammer promised to be a “strategic partner” when it comes to carrying out asylum procedures in safe third countries. But what Sunak sold as a success in Vienna is now turning into a political disaster for him.

Major doubts about its legality
The law that should make the Rwanda model possible is legally on shaky ground. The only flight scheduled to depart to East Africa so far was stopped at the last minute by an order from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Britain’s highest court later declared the asylum pact unlawful. The judgments stated that Rwanda was not a safe third country.

Sunak then introduced a bill that would grant Rwanda safe status. The law was passed reluctantly and directs courts to ignore key parts of the Human Rights Act. The first planes are expected to take off in early July. Legal experts doubt whether the law will hold up. Objections have already been submitted from various sides.

How safe is Rwanda?
In 2021, the British government itself criticized Rwanda for its treatment of refugees. Criticism was leveled at “extrajudicial killings, deaths in custody, disappearances and torture.” In their ruling, the judges also pointed to an incident in 2018 when Rwandan police opened fire on protesting refugees, killing at least 11 people.

Although the “land of a thousand hills” has experienced a huge economic boom in recent years, its human rights record is questionable. President Paul Kagame’s system of government has been internationally criticized for a lack of press freedom, suppression of the opposition, election manipulation and the destabilization of eastern Congo.

Financial disaster for taxpayers
In addition to declining credibility, Sunak is also threatened with financial disaster, as a report from the British Audit Office shows. It has now been discovered that London has already handed over £290 million to the dictatorial regime in Kigali. Once the first 300 migrants arrive in Rwanda, a further £120 million will be due. Each asylum seeker will be charged an additional £150,000 for housing, food, education and healthcare.

A plane ticket costs as much as £11,000 per person. £12.6 million is earmarked for training security forces to start with and £1 million per year thereafter. The Telegraph estimated the total cost at up to £5 billion, spread over five years. The one-way ticket to Rwanda could cost British taxpayers up to £1.8 million per asylum seeker, especially at the start of the operation.

Billions against migrants?
The revelations follow a nearly three-year refusal by British governments to explain the full cost of the Rwanda model, citing “trade secrets”.

In December 2023, Sunak claimed the Rwanda plan would “literally save us billions in the long term”, without explaining the figures. According to the current Court of Auditors report, his model would entail significant additional costs.

According to research by the BBC, 52,000 asylum seekers currently qualify for the Rwanda model. How does such a small state even plan to process the asylum claims of so many people? Dictator Paul Kagame and his representatives have so far declined to be specific.

As a reminder, Rwanda is not even half the size of Austria.

The East African country has agreed “in principle” to take in 5,700 illegal immigrants in a first phase, Sunak’s Home Office said. Particularly embarrassing: the British authorities “lost contact” with 3,557 candidates from this group. This is evident from official documents, British media report. The question also remains open what should be done with the remaining 46,300 refugees.

At worst, Sunak would have handed over hundreds of millions of pounds to a dictator without flying a single refugee to Rwanda. The model cannot be implemented for the EU in any case, because EU law does not provide for asylum procedures in third countries.

Austria wants to change EU law
Nehammer referred to this in a conversation with journalists on Tuesday after the joint press conference with Sunak. The fifteen EU states that have so far been willing to change the legal situation need even more support. “If these procedures are successful and can be carried out safely, there will be evidence that it is actually possible to take effective action against organized crime involved in human smuggling and human trafficking.”

That is why the Rwanda model is so important. But here lies the next problem. If Britain actually succeeds despite all odds, the small African state’s resources will be limited anyway and there will be no alternatives in sight. Apart from Rwanda, there is currently no known country that wants to accept its asylum seekers from Europe.

Sunak needs a success
The British Prime Minister probably can’t worry about that, because he needs all the success he can get. A new parliament will be elected in Great Britain this year. The ruling Conservatives are languishing in the polls and lost almost 500 seats in local councils in recent local elections. Crises and scandals have been roiling the country for years.

Accordingly, Nehammer’s open ear came in handy for Sunak. The Prime Minister thanked ‘Karl’ in Vienna – especially for his ‘leadership’ on the asylum issue. Because ‘business as usual’ cannot continue. It is already clear: the Rwanda model is many things, but certainly not the usual one.