UK will not pay Rwanda more for scrapped migrant deal
The UK government has said it will not send further payments to Rwanda following the cancellation of the migrant deal between the two countries.
On Monday, Rwanda's government spokesperson Yolande Makolo said the UK had asked Rwanda to "quietly forgo" the remaining payment - reportedly amounting to £50m ($64m) - based on "trust and good faith".
However, Rwanda has now asked the UK to pay the remainder of the money it says it is owed, accusing the UK of breaching trust by suspending some aid to the country.
In a statment, a UK government spokesperson said that "no further payments in relation to this policy will be made and Rwanda has waived any additional payments".
The plan to deport some asylum seekers to Rwanda, devised by the previous Conservative government in 2022, cost the UK £240m ($310m) before being scrapped by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.
Speaking in July last year, shortly after being elected, Starmer said the plan was "dead and buried", arguing that the scheme had "never been a deterrent" and would only deport "less than 1%" of small boat arrivals.
Last month, the UK announced it would halt bilateral aid to Rwanda, "excluding support to the poorest and most vulnerable".
The UK took the decision to cut aid after accusing the country of supporting M23, a rebel group that has captured swathes of eastern Democratic Republic of Congo in a deadly uprising.
The aid cuts have amounted to "unjustified punitive measures to coerce Rwanda into compromising our national security", Makolo wrote on X.
Makolo said Rwanda would now be "following up" on outsanding payments relating to the migrant deal to which the UK was "legally bound".
Rwanda has often denied backing the M23 rebel group, but has recently been more defensive, saying it has had to take measures to deal with the "existential threat" posed by genocidal militia near its borders.
UN experts have previously estimated that between 3,000 and 4,000 Rwandan troops are in eastern DR Congo.
More than 7,000 people have died and hundreds of thousands have fled their homes since the conflict escalated in January, DR Congo's government says.
In a statement, a UK government spokesperson said "no further payments in relation to this policy will be made and Rwanda has waived any additional payments".
"The Home Secretary has been clear that the costly Migration and Economic Development Partnership with Rwanda wasted tax-payer money and should not continue," the spokesperson added.
Who's pulling the strings in the DR Congo crisis?
Rwanda angered by US sanctions over DR Congo violence
'They took all the women here': Rape survivors recall horror of DR Congo jailbreak
Go to BBCAfrica.com for more news from the African continent.
Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica
Africa Daily
Focus on Africa
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Congolese customs worker refused a bribe to give spoiled rice to the poor. He is beatified by Vatican
ROME — The Vatican has beatified a Congolese customs worker who was killed for resisting a bribe, giving young people in a place with endemic corruption a new model of holiness: someone who refused to allow spoiled rice to be distributed to poor people. The head of the Vatican's saint-making office, Cardinal Marcello Semeraro, presided over Sunday's beatification ceremony of Floribert Bwana Chui Bin Kositi at one of the pontifical basilicas in Rome, St. Paul Outside the Walls. The event attracted a cheering crowd of Congolese pilgrims and much of Rome's Congolese Catholic community, who were to be treated to a special audience Monday with Pope Leo XIV. The faithful wore T-shirts and vests with Kositi's portrait and erupted in chants and applause as soon as the beatification ceremony was concluded, waving Congolese flags. Kositi was kidnapped and killed in 2007 after he refused to allow rancid rice from Rwanda to be transported across the border to the eastern Congolese city of Goma. As an official with the Congolese government's customs quality control office, the 26-year-old knew the risks of resisting bribes offered to public officials. But he also knew the risks of allowing spoiled food to be distributed to the most desperate. 'On that day, those mafiosi found themselves in front of a young man who, in the name of the Gospel, said 'No.' He opposed,' his friend Aline Manani said. 'And Floribert, I think that for me personally, I would say for all young people, is a role model.' Pope Francis recognized Kositi as a martyr of the faith late last year, setting him on the path to beatification and to possibly become Congo's first saint. The move fit into the pope's broader understanding of martyr as a social justice concept, allowing those deemed to have been killed for doing God's work and following the Gospel to be considered for sainthood. 'Our country almost holds the gold medal for corruption among the countries of the world,' Goma Bishop Willy Ngumbi told reporters last week. 'Here, corruption is truly endemic. So, if we could at least learn from this boy's life that we must all fight corruption … I think that would be very important.' Transparency International last year gave Congo one of the poorest marks on its corruption perception index, ranking it 163 out of 180 countries surveyed and 20 on the organization's 0-to-100 scale, with 0 highly corrupt and 100 very clean. The beatification has brought joy to Goma at a time of anguish. Violent fighting between government forces and Rwanda-backed M23 rebels has led to the death of thousands of people, and the rebels' capture of the city has exacerbated what already was one of the world's biggest humanitarian crises. It has renewed the hopes of many in the country of more than 100 million whose development has been stifled by chronic corruption, which Francis railed against during his 2023 visit to the country. Speaking at the Kinshasa stadium then, Francis said Kositi 'could easily have turned a blind eye; nobody would have found out, and he might even have gotten ahead as a result. But since he was a Christian, he prayed. He thought of others and he chose to be honest, saying no to the filth of corruption.' The Italian priest who spearheaded Kositi's sainthood case, the Rev. Francesco Tedeschi, knew him through their work with the Community of Sant'Egidio. He broke down Saturday as he recounted Kositi's example and Francis' call for the church to recognize the ordinary holiness in the 'saints next door.' 'In the end, this was what Floribert was, because he was just a boy,' Tedeschi said as he began weeping. At Goma's Floribert Bwana Chui School of Peace, which is named in honor of Kositi and advocates for social justice, his beatification is encouraging all those who view him as a role model, school director Charles Kalimba told the Associated Press. 'It's a lesson for every generation, for the next generation, for the present generation and for all people. Floribert's life is a positive point that must be presented to the Congolese nation. We are in a country where corruption is almost allowed, and this is a challenge that must be taken up,' Kalimba said. Tedeschi said the martyr designation recognized that Kositi died out of hatred toward his faith, because his decision to not accept the spoiled food was inspired by the Christian idea of the dignity of everyone, especially the poor. Being declared a martyr exempts Kositi from the requirement that a miracle must be attributed to his intercession before he is beatified, thereby fast-tracking the process to get to the first step of sainthood. The Vatican must, however, confirm a miracle attributed to his intercession for him to be canonized, a process that can take years or more. Winfield, Kambumba and Asadu write for the Associated Press. Winfield reported from Rome, Kambumba from Goma and Asadu from Dakar, Senegal. AP writers Trisha Thomas and Isaia Montelione in Rome contributed to this report.
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
I know why the UN Security Council is irrelevant to Gaza. I was there when the US stood up for Israel
On October 7, 2023, like many around the world, I awoke to news of the horrific attacks perpetrated by Hamas against more than 1,200 innocent Israeli, American and other civilians who that day were doing nothing other than going about their lives. The television newscasts were bone-chilling – pictures of mutilated babies; of fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers slain in front of family members; of peace activists murdered in cold blood; and of the taking of 250 hostages, some of whom more than 20 months on are still being held. Later that day, the United States called for an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council to address this mass terror attack, the largest murder of Jews since the Holocaust. As the American ambassador to the UN responsible for Security Council matters, I represented the United States at the October 8 emergency meeting and demanded the council issue a statement expressly condemning Hamas for the ruthless terrorist attacks. Unfortunately, Russia, China and a few other council members refused to endorse such a statement. To put it simply, their refusal to call a spade a spade was abhorrent and incomprehensible. Note: To this day, the Security Council has yet to formally declare Hamas a terrorist group. Going into the October 8 emergency Security Council meeting, there had rightfully been much global sympathy for Israel – and certainly an expectation that Israel would have to respond militarily. However, once Israel took measures to defend itself, a right enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter, many nations, most notably from the Global South, condemned Israel's response as disproportionate and used it as a rallying cry to further isolate Israel in the multilateral system and beyond. To me and many of my U.S. government colleagues, this was not unexpected. Since joining the UN in 1948, there has been an unfortunate decline in support for Israel at the world body, a decline that began to accelerate following the period of decolonization in the 1960s. Many former colonies wrongly began to view the Israel-Palestinian conflict through the prism of their own struggles against European colonizers, with Israel viewed as a colonizer and the Palestinians as being colonized. Israel's relationship with the UN reached a nadir in 1975, when the UN General Assembly passed a highly politicized resolution equating Zionism with racism, a document that was finally revoked by the UNGA in 1991. Regrettably, efforts by the Palestinians and their supporters to isolate Israel at the UN have not abated and in fact have intensified since October 7, 2023. During my two-plus years in New York as ambassador, I engaged in a great deal of difficult diplomacy on the situation in Gaza and cast the sole veto of two UNSC draft resolutions related to the war, both of which lacked a clear condemnation of Hamas, a direct linkage of a ceasefire to the release of hostages, and a reference to Israel's Article 51 rights. Had these texts been adopted by the council, they would not have delivered an immediate ceasefire or a release of the hostages – but certainly would have given Hamas the time and space to rearm. Other council representatives privately agreed but nevertheless felt increasing pressure from their capitals to produce a council document calling for an immediate ceasefire. From the beginning of the conflict through the end of the Biden administration, the U.S. regularly proffered creative alternatives on ceasefire language, while most other council members insisted on an explicit reference to an immediate ceasefire. On rare occasions, the council was able to find common ground on Gaza wording when it focused on upholding the principles of humanitarian assistance and protection of civilians. But when some members opted to abandon council unity and force votes on resolutions containing unacceptable ceasefire language, the U.S. was left with no choice but to exercise its veto. Before each veto was cast, we recognized the potential collateral damage to America's international reputation; however, in our view the adoption of an unbalanced council resolution would have made a ceasefire neither practicable nor implementable given the highly charged and extremely complex situation on the ground. In the United States' view, the establishment of a limited and credible negotiation channel was essential for achieving an effective, durable and sustainable end to the war. While the Biden administration didn't achieve an end to the war on its watch, it did negotiate a three-phase diplomatic framework to pause the fighting and release the hostages, which was ultimately blessed by the council and backed by the Trump administration. To this day, one key factor hampering council unity on Gaza is Moscow and Beijing's exploitation of the situation there for a clear geopolitical end: deflect international attention away from Russia's savage war against Ukraine. In response to Russian statements in the Council on Gaza, which habitually condemned the U.S. for allegedly facilitating Israeli actions, I constantly reminded council members that Russia was in no position to criticize any country given the horrific war of aggression it was conducting in Ukraine. I also publicly warned Chinese diplomats that should they continue making false accusations about the U.S. concerning Gaza, I would immediately call out their country's support to Russia's military industrial base, refuting Beijing's fictitious claim that it supports neither party to the conflict. Russia and China must end their politicization of Gaza and either contribute constructively to peace efforts or simply get out of the way. While I had expected Russia and China to take adversarial positions, I was extremely disappointed that three U.S. partners on the council, Slovenia, Algeria and Guyana, chose to regularly piggyback on Russian and Chinese political shenanigans to push for more urgent council action on the issue. Their aim was to shame the U.S. and compel it to change course from its steadfast support of Israel in the war with Hamas. All the while, the three had been keenly aware that Washington was conducting sensitive negotiations behind the scenes with Israel, Qatar and Egypt on steps to facilitate a durable end to the fighting and ease civilian suffering in Gaza. But instead of getting fully behind those steps and working with us in good faith, they preferred to ratchet up public pressure on the U.S. and ignore American concerns about how their actions would be manipulated by Hamas and other malign actors in the region – Iran, Hezbollah and the Houthis – to the detriment of regional peace and security. Given persistent council divisions over the war in Gaza, some UN member states continue to lay the diplomatic predicate for a future General Assembly resolution (non-legally binding) calling for sanctions, an arms embargo and other tough international measures against Israel. The recent U.S. veto of another council resolution on Gaza will certainly provide fuel for those efforts. As I write, the Palestinians and their allies continue to ponder additional pathways to go after Israel throughout the UN system. There is even discussion in some UN circles about suspending Israel's voting rights in the General Assembly, an act that would deeply anger Washington and trigger severe political consequences for the UN. Since this tragic conflict began, I have been mystified as to why many UN officials believe that all the U.S. has to do is instruct Israel to end its pursuit of Hamas and then somehow a magical end to the fighting would materialize. On their part, I sense a genuine reluctance to treat Israel as a legitimate state with its own national security concerns. While the United States does indeed have influence with Israel, it is naïve at best for these colleagues to think America can simply dictate to Jerusalem what it should and shouldn't do in response to what it perceives as existential threats. Russia and China must end their politicization of Gaza and either contribute constructively to peace efforts or simply get out of the way. Misguided pressure on the U.S., relentless efforts to isolate Israel, Russian and Chinese diversionary tactics, blatant antisemitism, and a reluctance by some states to compromise continue to stymie the Security Council's ability to speak with one voice on ending the Gaza war. Until these unfortunate practices cease, the council will remain irrelevant to a resolution to Gaza and the broader Israel-Palestinian conflict. While no one can ignore the terrible tragedy that is now Gaza, it remains a fact that those UN member states that have influence with Hamas have made a strategic decision not to use it. The hesitancy of many countries over the years to publicly condemn Hamas as a terrorist group has only given it the oxygen it needs to carry on, no matter how much death and suffering Palestinians in Gaza continue to experience. To end this war, Hamas must disarm and disband. There will not be peace in Gaza until it does. Gazans deserve an opportunity to live in peace and to seek a prosperous future. Hamas' continued rule will bring them neither.
News24
6 hours ago
- News24
Struggle veteran Obbey Mabena: ‘Freedom without free education is not what we envisioned'
As the country observes Youth Day, children remain at the forefront of battles that outweigh their young lives. Exiled during apartheid, Mabena says SA is not too poor to provide free education and quality housing. The older generation has a responsibility to educate and equip the youth with the knowledge of SA's history. Struggle veteran Obbey Mabena, who turned 75 recently, joined the ANC in March 1976, three months before the Soweto uprisings. He was immediately tasked with recruiting youngsters into the movement and later travelled to Swaziland to report to party officials that he was ready to mobilise. When the protests broke out on 16 June, he was still in that country, only returning to Soweto on 19 June. 'So, I left again on 20 June 1976. They [the security police] were looking for me because of the role I had played in opposing the introduction of Afrikaans as a medium of instruction in black schools. So, I went back to Swaziland and then to Angola and didn't return home for eight years.' On his return, Mabena learnt that his family had been harassed by the apartheid forces for three days. They showed up at their home demanding to know his whereabouts. This meant he was not safe in SA, prompting Mabena to leave a day later. He was subsequently taken to what was dubbed the ANC Quatro, which he described as a prison. There, extreme force and torture were unleashed on him and others – the same treatment they had endured under the apartheid regime. The youth of 1976, whose bravery against armed apartheid police is at the centre of the commemoration of Youth Day annually on 16 June, were essentially children; teenagers who were still in high school. A few months ago, children even younger took to the streets, holding up placards protesting #JusticeForCwecwe. Asked about his sentiments on children fighting battles that adults are more equipped to undertake, he lamented the distortion of the slogan Power to the People. He added that the infiltration of apartheid into black communities left a systemic lapse in society's moral fibre. Youth Day honors the bravery of the youth of 1976 and the profound role they played in the liberation of 🇿🇦South Africa.... Posted by Embassy of Belgium in Pretoria on Saturday, June 15, 2024 Speaking on the education system, Mabena said this was nowhere near the freedom that he and his comrades had envisioned when they embarked on the liberation struggle. He said education was a tool with which they had hoped black people's lives would be changed for the better. If the funds in SA were not being mismanaged, we would be able to afford giving our children and grandchildren free education, which is one of the things we were fighting for. Some countries, which are far poorer than SA, can provide free education. Obbey Mabena 'Even these poor-quality RDP houses – our people deserve better. We are one of the richest countries in Africa, accounting for more than 70% of the world's platinum production. Where does that money go? We can afford to give our people better,' he bemoaned. Supplied Mabena, the father of Duma Collective founder Sibu Mabena, strongly condemned the reference to youngsters as the lost generation. Mabena's sentiment was that apartheid left enduring systemic injustices that have derailed the educating of young people about SA's real history and arming them with the right tools to take the baton from veterans like him. 'Young people can't take over out of the blue. We must teach them about where we come from and what we intended when we started fighting for our country.'
