On Sunday, the Rwandan foreign minister said he was talking to the Trump administration “initial stages” about the contract that his country would adopt migrants deported from the US.
The news had a ring familiar to the UK. There, the former conservative-led government agreed to a contract in 2022 to permanently expel asylum seekers in Rwanda, and then spent two years and hundreds of millions of pounds (almost useless) to make the plan come true.
When the UK Supreme Court ruled that the proposal had violated human rights law, the Conservative government sought to use new laws to override the ruling. But in the end, the policy proved to be an almost complete failure, and the new labour government elected last year discarded it, citing its immense costs and workplace nature.
Below are some lessons that the UK's fiasco might hold for the Trump administration.
It can be expensive.
The UK government spent £715 million and about $955 million on the plan.
Not only did £290 million be paid directly to the Rwandan government, but millions more continued to prepare deportation flights, readily detention centres and IT systems, staffing and legal fees. But in the end, only four immigrants were sent to Rwanda.
Official documents show that the figure was only a small portion of what was spent when the transaction was fully undertaken. The UK government had agreed to pay Rwanda £150,000 to everyone deported. This is the amount you pay for a five-year “integrated package” of accommodation, food, health services and education.
After the transaction was abolished, Rwanda said it would not return a refund as there was no refund clause.
Labour's Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said the Conservatives had planned to ultimately spend more than £10 billion on Rwandan policies over six years.
Conservatives argued that the cost was worth it, as few people would come to the UK on a small boat if they were afraid of being sent to Rwanda.
Rwanda probably can't bring many exiles.
The country in Central Africa is about 10,000 square miles, roughly the same size as in Massachusetts.
The Trump administration has not revealed how many people they want to send to Rwanda, already one of the world's most dense countries.
At a 2023 UK Supreme Court hearing, a lawyer representing the government recognized that the number of asylum seekers that Rwanda could take was “low at first” and cited the country's need for “capacity building.”
British news reports at the time suggest that a total of up to 1,000 people could have transferred from the UK to Rwanda over the course of five years. In 2022, when the contract was struck, at least 45,000 people arrived in the UK on small boats.
Under Israeli dealings, migrants sent to Rwanda disappeared.
The Washington contract is the latest in a series of immigration agreements that Rwanda has attacked. African countries already host hundreds of African refugees from Libya awaiting resettlement under a deal agreed with the UN refugee agencies and the African Union six years ago.
The British Treaty was never fully tested before it was discarded. However, the secret agreement signed with Israel in 2013 was run for five years before it was found illegal by the Supreme Court of Israel. Details of the agreement were discussed in court battles in the UK.
Under Israeli contracts, Eritrea and Sudan asylum seekers who had sought evacuation in Israel were deported to Rwanda in a “explicit effort” to “enjoy human rights and freedoms,” according to documents provided in evidence during the UK Supreme Court hearing.
However, British justice has discovered that Rwanda has not adhered to those guarantees and that asylum seekers deported by Israel “everyday, secretly moving to Uganda” would be forced to the border or board a plane.
The Rwandan government did not immediately respond to requests for comment on this article.
There may be legal challenges.
The Trump administration has already shown an appetite to resist the courts and has refused to comply with an order that would return at least two men who have been mistakenly deported to El Salvador's infamous prison.
However, in the case of the UK, the fact that the program violated multiple national laws enforcing human rights, and the United Nations Refugee Convention contributed to the ultimate failure of the program. Under the terms of the transaction, Rwanda was to accept undocumented immigrants and process asylum applications. Even if migrants were later found to qualify for refugee status, they were expected to resettle in Rwanda and not return to the UK.
The UK Supreme Court held that the plan was illegal in November 2023, as there was a risk that real refugees would be sent back to the country they had fled.
Abdi Latif Dahir contributed the report.
