Why the Rwanda pact could backfire (2024)

Federal Chancellor Karl Nehammer believes that his counterpart Sunak is on to something big. On Tuesday, he praised the British "Rwanda model" as a "trailblazer" 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 is selling as a success in Vienna is turning into a political disaster for him.

Big doubts about legality
The law that is supposed to make the Rwanda model possible is on shaky legal ground. The only flight to take off for East Africa to date was stopped at the last minute by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) by means of a temporary injunction. The highest court in the UK later declared the asylum pact illegal. The rulings stated that Rwanda was not a safe third country.

Sunak then introduced a bill granting Rwanda safe status. The law was grudgingly waved through and instructs the courts to ignore important sections of the Human Rights Act. The first planes are due to take off at the beginning of July. Legal experts doubt whether the law will hold. Objections have already been lodged by several parties.

How safe is Rwanda?
The British government itself criticized Rwanda in 2021 for its treatment of refugees. It criticized "extrajudicial killings, deaths in custody, disappearances and torture". In their ruling, the judges also referred to an incident in 2018 when Rwandan police opened fire on protesting refugees and killed at least eleven people.

Although the "land of a thousand hills" has experienced an enormous economic upswing in recent years, the human rights situation is questionable. President Paul Kagame's system of government is internationally criticized for a lack of press freedom, suppression of the opposition, manipulation of elections and the destabilization of eastern Congo.

Financial disaster for taxpayers
In addition to dwindling credibility, Sunak is also facing a financial disaster, as a report by the British Audit Office shows. It has now been established that London has already transferred 290 million pounds to the dictatorial regime in Kigali. As soon as the first 300 migrants have arrived in Rwanda, a further 120 million pounds will be due. More than 150,000 pounds will be added per asylum seeker for accommodation, food, education and healthcare.

A plane ticket costs a whopping 11,000 pounds per person. For the training of security forces, 12.6 million pounds are earmarked at the start and one million per year thereafter. The Telegraph put the total cost at up to five billion pounds, spread over five years. The one-way ticket to Rwanda could cost the British taxpayer up to 1.8 million pounds (around two million euros) per asylum seeker, especially at the start of the operation.

Billions against migrants?
The revelations follow almost three years of refusal by UK governments to explain the full cost of the Rwanda model, citing "commercial confidentiality".

In December 2023, Sunak claimed that the Rwanda plan "would literally save us billions in the long run" without explaining the figures. According to the latest ACA report, however, his model would entail considerable additional costs.

According to BBC research, 52,000 asylum seekers would currently be eligible for the Rwanda model. How does such a small country intend to process the asylum applications of so many people? Dictator Paul Kagame and his representatives have so far refused 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 irregular immigrants in a first phase, Sunak's Ministry of the Interior explained. Particularly embarrassing: from this group, the British authorities have "lost contact" with 3557 candidates. This is according to official documents, British media report. In addition, the question of what should happen to the remaining 46,300 refugees remains unanswered.

In the worst case scenario, Sunak would have transferred hundreds of millions of pounds to a dictator without having flown even one refugee to Rwanda. The model is not feasible for the EU anyway, as EU law does not provide for asylum procedures in third countries.

Austria wants to change EU law
However, Nehammer referred to this in a conversation with journalists on Tuesday after the joint press conference with Sunak. The 15 EU states that have so far been willing to change the legal situation need even more support, he said. "If these procedures are successful and can also be carried out safely, then it will also be proven that it is actually possible to take effective action against organized crime involved in the smuggling and trafficking of human beings."

That is why the Rwanda model is so important. But this is where the next problem lurks. Should the UK actually succeed despite all the resistance, the resources of the small African state are limited anyway and there are no alternatives in sight. Apart from Rwanda, no other country is yet known to be willing to take its asylum seekers from Europe.

Sunak needs a success
The British Prime Minister is unlikely to care much, as he needs every success. A new parliament is due to be elected in the UK this year. The ruling Conservatives are at the bottom of the polls and lost almost 500 seats on local councils in the most recent local elections. Crises and scandals have kept the country on edge for years.

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" must not be allowed to continue. It is already clear that the Rwanda model is many things, but certainly not business as usual.

This article has been automatically translated,
read the original article here.