KIGALI: British Home Secretary James Cleverly flew to Rwanda on Tuesday in a bid to revive a plan to send asylum-seekers to the East African country that has been blocked by UK courts.
The UK government said Cleverly will meet his Rwandan counterpart, Vincent Biruta, to sign a new treaty and discuss next steps for the troubled “migration and economic development partnership.”
“Rwanda cares deeply about the rights of refugees, and I look forward to meeting with counterparts to sign this agreement and further discuss how we work together to tackle the global challenge of illegal migration,” Cleverly said.
The Rwanda plan is central to the Conservative government’s self-imposed goal of stopping unauthorized asylum-seekers arriving on small boats across the English Channel.
Britain and Rwanda struck a deal in April 2022 for some migrants who cross the Channel to be sent to Rwanda, where their asylum claims would be processed and, if successful, they would stay. The UK government argues that the deportations will discourage others from making the risky sea crossing and break the business model of people-smuggling gangs.
Critics say it is both unethical and unworkable to send migrants to a country 4,000 miles (6,400 kilometers) away, with no chance of ever settling in the UK
Britain has already paid Rwanda at least 140 million pounds ($177 million) under the agreement, but no one has yet been sent there amid legal challenges.
Last month the UK Supreme Court ruled the plan was illegal because Rwanda is not a safe country for refugees. Britain’s top court said asylum-seekers faced “a real risk of ill-treatment” and could be returned by Rwanda to the home countries they had fled.
For years, human rights groups have accused Rwanda’s government of cracking down on perceived dissent and keeping tight control on many aspects of life, from jailing critics to keeping homeless people off the streets of Kigali. The government denies it.
The UK government responded by saying it would strike a new treaty with Rwanda to address the court’s concerns — including a block on Rwanda sending migrants home — and then pass a law declaring Rwanda a safe destination.
UK Home Secretary James Cleverly visits Rwanda to try to unblock controversial asylum plan
https://arab.news/6q47v
UK Home Secretary James Cleverly visits Rwanda to try to unblock controversial asylum plan
UK veterans are ‘ticking time bomb’ after Iraq war chemical exposure
- Fifteen former RAF personnel were deployed to the Qarmat Ali water plant in 2003, which was contaminated with sodium dichromate
- Veterans say they were not screened or protected, and are now living with serious health conditions
LONDON: Fifteen British servicemen who worked on a carcinogen-contaminated water treatment site during the Iraq war say they were not offered biological screening despite official guidance saying they should have been.
The former Royal Air Force members, who have suffered from ailments including cancer, tumors and nosebleeds, told Sky News they were offered no medical assistance or subsequent treatment after having been exposed to toxic sodium dichromate at the Qarmat Ali water treatment plant in 2003.
The channel said it had seen a letter from the RAF’s medical authority stating that senior officers knew of the dangers posed by the substance.
Peter Lewis, 53, was one of 88 personnel deployed to guard the site, which was deemed vital for getting Iraq’s oil industry up and running. He told Sky: “I’ve had eight or nine operations to remove cancer.
“I’ve had so many lumps taken out of my neck, one on my face. This is something I’m literally fighting every year now. It’s constant.”
Qarmat Ali, the former troops say, was covered in ripped bags of bright orange sodium dichromate.
“We were never warned what the bags of chemicals were,” Jon Caunt, another former serviceman, said. “We were breathing this stuff in.”
His former comrade Tony Watters added: “I never thought about what it was. We were told the site is safe.”
Several months after deployment to the site, however, the servicemen were joined by two workers wearing protective gear who placed signs around it reading: “Warning. Chemical hazard. Full protective equipment and chemical respirator required. Sodium dichromate exposure.”
Watters said: “When you left the site, your uniform was contaminated, your webbing was contaminated.
“You went in your sleeping bag, and that was contaminated. And you were contaminating other people with it back at camp.”
Andy Tosh, who has led the group of veterans as they sought answers from the Ministry of Defence, said: “Even with the warning signs going up … they kept us there. They knowingly kept us exposed.”
The RAF gave some of the men a leaflet on their return to the UK, warning of the dangers of the substance, but not all were told.
The letter seen by Sky acknowledging the dangers posed to the veterans made a “strong” link to “increased risk of lung and nose cancer” as well as numerous other issues. It suggested personnel sent to Qarmat Ali should have their medical records altered to mention their exposure to sodium dichromate.
“Offer biological screening. This cannot be detailed until the numbers exposed are confirmed,” the letter also said.
An inquiry into US personnel deployed to Qarmat Ali found that 830 people were “unintentionally exposed” to sodium dichromate, giving them access to support from the US Department of Veterans Affairs. This came after the death of Lt. Col. James Gentry from cancer in 2009, which the US Army determined came “in line of duty for exposure to sodium dichromate.”
There has been no such inquiry by UK authorities despite British personnel being deployed at the site for longer than their American counterparts.
Thirteen of them have suffered from cancer and similar symptoms, including one who developed a brain tumor.
Jim Garth told Sky: “My skin cancer will never go away … It’s treatable, but when the treatment is finished, it comes back, so I’ve got that for life really.”
Lewis added: “I’m actually getting to the point now where I don’t care anymore … sooner or later, it’s going to do me.”
Caunt described his former colleagues’ conditions as a “ticking time bomb.”
He added: “We do not know what’s going to happen in the future."
The MoD insists medical screening was offered to personnel at the time, despite the men stating that it was not. In 2024, several met with Labour MPs about the issue. One, John Healey, who is now the UK defence secretary, said at the time the veterans should have “answers to their important questions.”
In a statement, the MoD said: “We take very seriously the concerns raised by veterans who were deployed to guard the Qarmat Ali Water Treatment Plant in 2003.
“As soon as we were alerted to the possible exposure of Sodium Dichromate, an environmental survey was conducted to evaluate typical exposure at Qarmat Ali. Results showed that the levels at the time were significantly below UK government guidance levels.”
A 2004 letter seen by Sky News suggested, however, that the MoD knew the levels of sodium dichromate were higher.
“Anyone who requires medical treatment can receive it through the Defence Medical Services and other appropriate services,” the MoD said.
“Veterans who believe they have suffered ill health due to service can apply for no-fault compensation under the War Pensions Scheme.”
Watters called on the government to hold an investigation into what happened at Qarmat Ali.
“We are the working class, we are ex-soldiers who have put our lives on the line and you’re turning a blind eye to us,” he said.
Garth added: “We felt let down at Qarmat Ali all those years ago, and we still feel let down now.”
