The former UK government’s financial relationship with Rwanda has to come under increasing scrutiny in light of Kigali’s alleged role in destabilising the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). As reports continue to surface about Rwanda’s backing of the M23 rebel group in eastern DRC, serious questions must be asked about how much the Conservative party leadership in previous governments allowed UK taxpayer money to be used to fund a regime accused of waging proxy wars and repressing human rights.
The UK’s financial involvement with Rwanda was primarily framed within the controversial UK-Rwanda Migration and Economic Development Partnership, introduced by the previous Conservative governments. Under this scheme, the UK pledged to provide Rwanda with £370 million in development funding, with an additional £120 million promised once the first 300 asylum seekers were relocated. Beyond this, the UK had committed to paying up to £171,000 per person sent to Rwanda as part of a five-year integration package. By the end of 2023, it had been reported that some £240 million had already been disbursed, with another £50 million was said to have been due in April 2024. Despite these substantial payments, the policy yielded no tangible benefits for the UK, with no asylum seekers forcibly relocated under the scheme due to legal challenges.
The Labour government, after winning the 2024 election, swiftly moved to scrap the Rwanda policy. However, the money had already been spent, raising further questions about accountability and fiscal oversight.
Meanwhile, Rwanda’s role in the ongoing conflict in the DRC has drawn international condemnation. Reports from the United Nations, European Union, and the United States indicate that Rwanda has provided direct military support to the M23 rebel group. The recent capture of Goma by M23 rebels—reportedly backed by Rwandan forces—has exacerbated regional tensions and led to calls for immediate international intervention.
The Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) stated on 30 January 2025 that the UK “condemns the occupation of Goma and other territories in eastern DRC by M23 and Rwandan Defence Forces (RDF) as an unacceptable breach of DRC’s sovereignty and the UN Charter.” The UK government has since warned Rwanda that its aid package – amounting to over $1 billion annually from various sources – could be reconsidered due to its role in fuelling conflict in the DRC.
Beyond its alleged involvement in the DRC, Rwanda’s government has been widely criticised for its human rights record. Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and the UN have all documented cases of political repression, enforced disappearances, arbitrary detentions, and restrictions on press freedom under President Paul Kagame’s leadership.
Dr. Iain Overton, Executive Director of Action on Armed Violence, commented: “The Conservatie party’s decision to fund Rwanda while knowing its human rights record and role in the DRC conflict represents a catastrophic failure of policy. This is money that could have been used for genuine humanitarian support or resettlement programmes, rather than propping up a regime that silences dissent and fuels war.”
In August 2022, Dr Overton was denied press accreditation to report on the human rights conditions of refugees in Rwanda, highlighting serious concerns even then about transparency in the country’s asylum system. Despite submitting his application a month in advance and exchanging over 100 messages with the Rwandan Media Commission, Overton was left without accreditation, in contrast to a Daily Mail journalist – working for a paper that had supported the Rwanda deportation scheme – who had been granted access. This refusal raised fundamental questions about whether British journalists were then able to scrutinise the UK-Rwanda asylum deal, particularly given Rwanda’s troubling human rights record, including the 2018 killing of twelve Congolese refugees by Rwandan police, for which no justice has been served.
Given this, and the current revelations about proxy wars, AOAV calls for greater transparency regarding the past and continuing financial relationship between the UK and Rwanda. The British government must disclose the full extent of all taxpayer money sent to Rwanda and where such money was spent, and to ensure that future aid is not misused to support authoritarian regimes or regional conflicts.
If the UK is serious about upholding human rights and international stability, it must reassess its foreign policy approach and demand accountability for past mistakes.
Did you find this story interesting? Please support AOAV's work and donate.
Donate