Publications /
Opinion

Back
Refugees for Money: Some Questions
Authors
July 1, 2022

A principle seems to be establishing itself as a basic tenet of refugee and irregular-migration management policies in host countries in Europe and elsewhere: if you do not want refugees, pay to keep them in, or ‘outsource’ them to, poorer countries. But this raises some basic moral, political, and even financial questions.

The approach was pioneered by Australia, which in 2012 began shipping migrants who arrived on its shores irregularly by boat to Papua New Guinea and Nauru in the south-western Pacific. The program was said to cost the Australian government more than €650 million a year for just over 3,000 irregular migrants transferred offshore[1]. Then, in January 2019, the U.S. under President Trump launched its ‘Remain in Mexico’ policy, under which it returned to Mexico certain asylum applicants detained in the U.S. In the first two years of application, 71,000 migrants were affected, with the policy requiring them to wait in Mexico for months or years for the resolution of their applications (in tent courts). The program was suspended in June 2021 by the new Biden Administration, but reinstated again in December 2021, involving 7,259 more migrants in the first six months of 2022. In exchange, the U.S. provided more than $331 million in humanitarian aid to asylum-seekers, refugees, and other vulnerable migrants to Mexico and other Central American countries in 2021.

 

The British government has now taken up this externalization of migration policy, with an agreement reached in April 2022 with Rwanda (a ‘migration and economic development partnership’). Rwanda will receive during five years an undetermined number of migrants who arrive in Britain irregularly from France. The relocated migrants -single, young and male, according to the British government guidance- will present their asylum applications in Rwanda.

In exchange, the U.K. made un upfront contribution of €144 million (around 1.4% of Rwanda’s GDP) for the “economic development and growth of Rwanda”, and to finance “the asylum operations, accommodation and integration similar to the costs incurred in the UK for those services”. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees made clear that this scheme of ‘money for refugees’ goes against the obligations imposed on the UK as a signatory of the 1951 Convention of the statute of refugees[2].

After several legal setbacks, first before the British courts and then on June 14, the European Court of Human Rights (associated to the Council of Europe, not the European Union), the British government had to suspend the first charter flight to Rwanda, which would have carried the first seven of 100 refugees originally set to depart. Despite this and the public uproar about the plans (more than 20 bishops of the Church of England published a letter calling it “immoral” and saying it brings shame on Britain[3]), the government has clearly committed to continue with the policy in the near future, even speaking about it covering “tens of thousands” of refugees. Other countries, such as Denmark, are known for having proposed similar agreements involving Rwanda and other African countries[4], and between 2013 and 2018 a similar agreement was reached between Israel on the one side and Uganda and Rwanda on the other one to send 4,000 Eritrean and Sudanese asylum seekers who had submitted their applications in Israel. Rwanda is one of the most densely populated countries in the world and already hosts more than 130,000 refugees, mainly from Burundi and the Democratic Republic of Congo. It also has a ‘transit centre’ for more than 1,000 recognized refugees and asylum seekers relocated from Libya by UNHCR. It plans to host refugees arriving from the UK in hotels near Kigali, the capital, and provide them with refugee support or, if their asylum applications are refused, with the possibility to integrate into the country for other reasons.

The money for refugees trade-off is also reflected in the recent agreement reached within the European Union to distribute irregular migrants arriving at its borders. EU member country interior ministers agreed on June 11 on a “compulsory solidarity mechanism” for newly arrived migrants, in case of a migration crisis in one or more member states, in application of the Commission proposals made in September 2020 in the framework of the New Pact on Migration and Asylum[5]. EU countries that do not wish to receive migrants will have to make a financial contribution or help help other partners financially to pay for the return of migrants in an irregular situation without the right to asylum.

The agreement follows the failed attempt approved by EU leaders in June 2018 to create “disembarkation centres” in third countries in the Southern Mediterranean to get rid of the migrants rescued in the waters of the Mediterranean, a project promptly refused by all Maghreb countries. In any case, with the new agreement, the EU enshrines the rationale behind the EU-Turkey ‘deal’ of March 2016, under which Turkey committed to stop Syrian refugees travelling on from their territory to the EU (notably through Greece) and to readmit irregular migrants returned from the Greek islands in exchange for an amount of €6 billion over a three-year period. The money was intended to improve the humanitarian situation of the 3.6 million Syrian refugees in Turkey, i.e. money for keeping refugees on its territory.

For European countries, the question is clear: are human rights principles and international law commitments to be relegated for the political benefit that could obtained from a harsh policy towards irregular migration? And can countries opt out of solidarity in this critical issue if they pay an amount of money? Are basic values and principles to be subordinated to political pragmatism? Even if the European Union is meant to be first and foremost a community of values, and promotion of human rights is enshrined in Article 2 of the treaties as a founding principle of the Union (“The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities”), political calculations seem to have prevailed since 2015.

For Rwanda and other African countries, also in North Africa, these developments pose another dilemma: is taking refugees from developed countries in exchange for increased financial resources for development a policy that can be politically justified? Is committing to this new tool of European externalization of migration policy morally acceptable? What message does it give to the international community on the role Africa wants to play in the international division of labour?

 


[1] Madeline Gleeson and Natasha Yacoub (2021), 'Cruel, Costly and Ineffective: the failure of offshore processing in Australia', Kaldor Centre's Policy Brief no. 11, https://www.kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/sites/kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/files/Policy_Brief_11_Offshore_Processing.pdf.

[2]https://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2022/4/62585e814/un-refugee-agency-opposes-uk-plan-export-asylum.html.

[3] https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/immoral-rwanda-policy-shames-britain-say-archbishops-bg55d7gm0.

[4] https://euromedrights.org/migrants-and-refugees-in-denmark/.

[5] See Iván Martín (2021), “New Pact of Migration and Asylum in the European Union: What Stakes for the Maghreb and Africa?”, Policy Brief PB 21/03, Policy Center for the New South, https://www.policycenter.ma/sites/default/files/2021-01/PB_21_03_Martin.pdf.

RELATED CONTENT

  • Authors
    Sabine Cessou
    September 24, 2018
    La conférence « A Brave New World, Adapting to a changing security landscape », organisée par Friends of Europe, le 20 septembre 2018 à Bruxelles, a consisté en des tables rondes auxquelles ont participé Bouchra Rahmouni Benhida, Senior Research Fellow d'OCP Policy Center et Amal El Ouassif, Research Assistant, notamment sur les plus grands défis de la politique extérieure européenne. « C’était très gratifiant de voir distribuées, aujourd’hui, les conclusions sur la migration d’un b ...
  • Authors
    Malik Abaddi
    August 8, 2018
    The African Union goes to Mauritania Under the theme “Winning the Fight Against Corruption”, the 31st Summit of the African Union was held in early July in the desert capital Nouakchott. In a bitter prelude in late June, the AU’s commitment to this central theme was dealt a blow with the sudden – and public – resignation of Ghana’s Daniel Batidam from the AU Advisory Board on Corruption. Off to a rocky start, the summit had an even rougher road ahead of it.  A month before the lau ...
  • June 19, 2018
    Speakers: - General Birame Diop, Chief of Staff, Senegal Air Force - Colonel Raul Rivas, Chief of Plans and Strategy Division, US Africa Command - General Dominique Trinquand, Former Head, French Military Mission to the UN and NATO Chair: Kristin De Peyron, Head of Division, Pan-African...
  • Authors
    December 18, 2017
    La conférence Atlantic Dialogues 2017 s'est poursuivie le 14 décembre à Marrakech en passant progressivement de l'économie à la géopolitique. Des personnalités du Nord et du Sud se sont répondues, dans un débat franc et ouvert.  Hubert Védrine, ancien ministre français des Affaires étrangères, a livré son analyse de la diplomatie mondiale en ces termes : « Tous les pays défendent leurs intérêts et développent des idées, mais une dizaine seulement ont une vraie politique étrangère. L ...
  • Authors
    Mohammad Zia
    December 15, 2017
    As I arrived in Casablanca, I swerved between the crowds and baggage carousels to find someone I had never met before. That day in Casablanca was my first as a U.S. Fulbright Research Scholar seeking to learn more about Morocco’s energy sector. Only three months into my time in Morocco, I have had the chance to befriend young Moroccans and share conversations about Morocco’s burgeoning economy and its plans to build the world’s largest solar power plant. These Moroccan youth also s ...
  • Authors
    December 13, 2017
    A clear African perspective and a candid debate… This is how the 6th edition of the Atlantic Dialogues high-level conference, organized by the Moroccan think tank OCP Policy Center in Marrakech, has started this morning. The six authors of the 2017 edition of the annual report Atlantic Currents, published by the OCP Policy Center, have debated with the room - some 350 participants - on the crucial questions of African migration, economic integration, and the possibilities of a conti ...
  • December 13, 2017
    Le rapport Atlantic Currents 2017 sort en marge de la 6ème édition des Atlantic Dialogues, conférence de haut niveau organisée annuellement au Maroc par l’OCP Policy Center et ayant comme mission de promouvoir le dialogue transatlantique entre toutes les parties prenantes de cet espace géostratégique (Afrique, Caraïbes, Europe, Amérique latine et États-Unis), un dialogue devenu nécessité vu les changements rapides survenus de tous les côtés de l'Atlantique au cours des dernières ann ...
  • December 13, 2017
    As a significant complement to the Atlantic Dialogues conference, the Atlantic Currents publication allows a deeper and further extension of the analytic contribution provided by the “Dialogues”.The goal being to enlarge the discussion pertaining to economic, political and security dimensions of a wider Atlantic area, favoring a new geopolitical construction of this strategic region. OCP Policy Center is proud of the role it has played in extending the transatlantic debate to embrac ...
  • Authors
    July 7, 2017
    Ce Policy Brief traite de l’articulation entre le développement et la sécurité dans le bassin méditerranéen, ainsi que de l’implication des pays des deux rives, nord et sud, dans un partenariat assurant la sécurité nécessaire à un développement socio-économique conjoint. Les pays du Sahel prennent également part à l’analyse et conditionnent le succès des stratégies sécuritaires au Maghreb et au sein de l’Union Européenne. Le papier revient sur des exemples de pays riches mais frappé ...