The West and its migration policy in Africa: Africa’s growing role as a subcontractor
Western migration policy continues to evolve, with an increasingly marked tendency to outsource the management of asylum applications. Africa, for its part, has become the preferred playground for this new approach. Indeed, European countries, such as England, Denmark and soon Austria, have concluded agreements with Rwanda for the latter to process asylum requests addressed to their government.
This approach, which makes Africa the subcontractor of the West’s migration policy, raises serious concerns within humanitarian organizations. Indeed, considering economic issues as superior to human rights raises many questions about the priority given to economic interests over the protection of refugees.
Already in 2020, during Brexit, the EU refused to take in migrants who had been sent to England for integration reasons. Faced with the saturation of its migration system and the high costs of caring for migrants, England turned to Rwanda to find an emergency solution. Thus, any asylum request made in London was studied in Kigali. If approved, the migrant was allowed to live in Rwanda while benefiting from the protection of England. If refused, he had the possibility of submitting an asylum application in Kigali.
This migration partnership brought in $170 million to Rwanda last January, but was temporarily suspended by the English courts following criticism from human rights defenders. However, Denmark followed England’s lead and also concluded a similar agreement with Rwanda. Other countries such as Italy and Spain have also established migration partnerships with Tunisia and Mauritania. This policy arouses disapproval from African public opinion, who accuse African leaders, such as Paul Kagame and Kaïs Saïed, of being complicit in this approach.
Importantly, the African Union remains surprisingly calm on this issue, despite growing concern from international humanitarian organizations. While Western powers prioritize their economic interests, Rwanda and Tunisia seem to be doing well by offering their help to reduce illegal immigration to Europe.
The question now is who will be the next African nation to volunteer to help Europe with its migration policy? This question reflects the growing concern about the primacy given to economic interests over the protection of the rights of refugees in Africa.
In conclusion, Western migration policy, which increasingly outsources the management of asylum requests in Africa, poses serious moral and ethical questions. Using Africa as a subcontractor raises concerns about prioritizing economic interests over human rights. It is necessary to continue the debate on this issue and find solutions that respect both the rights of refugees and the economic interests of Western countries.