The West and Africa: controversial migration partnerships
The news highlights a worrying new trend: the West seeks to make Africa its main subcontractor in its anti-migrant policy. Recent statements by the Austrian Chancellor, Karl Nehammer, underline this desire for rapprochement between Vienna and Kigali for the processing of asylum requests. Rwanda, already a signatory of agreements with England and Denmark, would be on the verge of concluding a new one with Austria. A policy that is causing serious concern among humanitarian organizations.
This approach, which favors economic issues to the detriment of human rights, raises fears of an abandonment of fundamental values in favor of financial considerations. The first alarm signal was given in 2020 during Brexit, when the European Union refused to collect migrants sent to England for integration reasons. Faced with the saturation of their migration system and the high costs linked to caring for migrants, London turned to Kigali in search of emergency solutions.
Thus, an agreement was concluded between the two capitals: any asylum request made in London would be examined in Kigali. If approved, the migrant would be granted the right to reside in Rwanda while benefiting from the protection of England. In the event of refusal, it would possibly be possible for him to submit an asylum application in Kigali, under certain conditions. This measure, which earned Rwanda an initial payment of $170 million, was temporarily suspended by the British courts following protests from human rights defenders.
Despite this minor obstacle, Denmark has followed England’s lead and will soon be joined by Austria in establishing migration partnerships with Rwanda. Likewise, Italy and Spain have also concluded similar agreements with Tunisia and Mauritania. These partnerships are strongly condemned by African public opinion, who blame Paul Kagame for being the instigator of this controversial policy in Africa, as does Tunisian President Kaïs Saïed.
It is obvious that Kagame and Saïed are acting in their own interests, putting aside humanitarian concerns. We could expect a more visible reaction from the African Union to this situation. Having perfectly understood the logic of the primacy of economic interests for Western powers, the Rwandan president quickly positioned himself, thus giving his country a considerable lead over the rest of the continent in terms of migratory subcontracting.. His Tunisian counterpart finally joined him, after initially rejecting the proposal from Giorgia Meloni, President of the Italian Council, accompanied by Mark Rutte, former Dutch Prime Minister, and Ursula Von der Leyen, President of the European Commission.
This gradual emergence of these partnerships arouses strong opposition from international humanitarian organizations. The question that now arises is this: which will be the next African nation to voluntarily help Europe reduce illegal immigration? It is difficult to answer this question, but it is important to remain vigilant in the face of these developments, in order to preserve the rights and dignity of migrants.
In conclusion, it is essential to denounce this desire of the West to make Africa the subcontractor of its anti-migrant policy. Economic issues must not take precedence over the fundamental rights of individuals. Humanitarian organizations have a crucial role to play in raising public awareness and protecting the rights of migrants.