LONDON: UK leader Rishi Sunak faces the riskiest week of his premiership, with lawmakers gathering Monday to decide whether to back his flagship policy to send asylum seekers to Rwanda.
Factions of MPs from across Sunak’s divided Conservatives have convened meetings to consider how to vote when the controversial legislation goes before parliament on Tuesday.
Sunak has put the plan at the heart of his pledge to stop irregular migration, making the issue a key battleground in a general election expected next year.
But opposition to the scheme from both right-wingers and centrists is widening schisms in the ruling party, putting Sunak’s year-and-a-bit leadership in jeopardy.
The government announced a new bill last week after Supreme Court judges ruled in November that the deportation plan was illegal, as Rwanda was not a safe country.
The legislation would compel judges to treat Rwanda as safe and proposes giving UK ministers powers to disregard sections of human rights legislation.
The proposals have sparked fresh concerns from opposition parties, human rights groups and more moderate Tories who oppose any violations of international law by Britain.
However, right-wingers — including Robert Jenrick, who quit as immigration minister last week, and firebrand ex-home secretary Suella Braverman — say the legislation fails to go far enough.
Some on the right have called for Britain to withdraw from the European Court of Human Rights and other international treaties, to stop courts blocking removals.
Up to 100 backbench MPs from five different groupings on the Conservatives’ right wing, including the powerful European Research Group (ERG), which advocated a hard-line Brexit.
The ERG called the bill was “the toughest piece of migration legislation ever put forward by a UK government.”
But it said it only provided a “partial and incomplete solution” to expected legal challenges and would require “very significant amendments.”
The centrist One Nation group, which also has about 100 members, is expected to release its own statement later on Monday.
Tuesday is the first opportunity that MPs will have to vote on the legislation, in what is called a second reading.
A government bill has not been defeated at this stage in the process for almost 40 years.
But several abstentions would also damage Sunak, who was elected unopposed by Tory MPs in October last year following Liz Truss’s calamitous 49-day reign.
If it scrapes through, right-wingers are also expected to try to rewrite the legislation at later stages while the House of Lords upper chamber would have an opportunity to block it.
Sunak has bet his pledge to “stop the boats” crossing the Channel on the Rwanda scheme — which has been stuck in the courts since the first deportees were pulled off a flight at the last minute in June 2022, after an injunction from the European Court of Human Rights.
Almost 30,000 irregular migrants have crossed the Channel from northern France in rudimentary vessels this year.
Tory divisions have worsened since Britain voted to leave the European Union in 2016, largely on a promise to “take back control” of its borders.
Sunak, who has told MPs the Conservatives must “unite or die,” has denied that Tuesday’s vote amounts to a confidence vote on his leadership.
Some Westminster watchers have speculated that he may be tempted to call an early election — which must be held by January 2025 — if he loses the vote.
The Conservatives, in power since 2010, have served up five prime ministers since the 2016 Brexit vote.
They currently lag well behind Labour, the main opposition party, in opinion polls.
![]()
UK’s Sunak faces key test over Rwanda migrant policy vote
Short Url
https://arab.news/jyzmt
UK’s Sunak faces key test over Rwanda migrant policy vote
- Sunak has put the plan at the heart of his pledge to stop irregular migration, making the issue a key battleground in a general election expected next year
Congress taking first votes on Iran war as debate rages about US goals
- The US Senate is headed toward a vote on President Donald Trump’s decision to embark on a war against Iran
- It’s an extraordinary test in Congress for a conflict that has rapidly spread across the Middle East with no clear US exit strategy
WASHINGTON: The US Senate is headed toward a vote Wednesday on President Donald Trump’s decision to embark on a war against Iran, an extraordinary test in Congress for a conflict that has rapidly spread across the Middle East with no clear US exit strategy.
The legislation, known as a war powers resolution, gives lawmakers an opportunity to demand congressional approval before any further attacks are carried out. The Senate resolution and a similar bill being voted on in the House later this week face unlikely paths through the Republican-controlled Congress and would almost certainly be vetoed by Trump even if they were to pass.
Nonetheless, the votes marked a weighty moment for lawmakers. Their decisions on the five-day-old war — which Trump entered without congressional approval — could determine the fates of US military members, countless other lives and the future of the region.
“Wars without clear objectives do not remain small. They get bigger, bloodier, longer and more expensive,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer at a news conference Tuesday. “This is not a necessary war. It’s a war of choice.”
Trump administration scrambles for congressional support
After launching a surprise attack against Iran on Saturday, Trump has scrambled to win support for a conflict that Americans of all political persuasions were already wary of entering. Trump administration officials have been a frequent presence on Capitol Hill this week as they try to reassure lawmakers that they have the situation under control.
“We are not going to put American troops in harm’s way,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters in a raucous news conference at the Capitol Tuesday.
But six US military members were killed over the weekend in a drone strike in Kuwait.
Trump has also not ruled out deploying US ground troops. He has said he is hoping to end the bombing campaign within a few weeks, but his goals for the war have shifted from regime change to stopping Iran from developing nuclear capabilities to crippling its navy and missile programs.
“I think they are achieving great success with what they’ve done so far,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Tuesday, adding that what happens next in the country will be “largely up to the Iranian people.”
Almost all Republican senators were readying to vote Wednesday against the war powers resolution to halt military action, but a number still expressed hesitation at the idea of deploying troops on the ground in Iran.
“I don’t think the American people want to see troops on the ground,” said Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana, as he exited a classified briefing Tuesday. He added that Trump administration officials “left open that possibility,” but it wasn’t an option they were emphasizing.
Lawmakers to go on record
The votes in Congress this week represented potentially consequential markers of just where lawmakers stand on the war as they look ahead to midterm elections and the consequences of the conflict.
“Nobody gets to hide and give the president an easy pass or an end-run around the Constitution,” said Sen. Tim Kaine, the Virginia Democrat leading the war powers resolution. “Everybody’s got to declare whether they’re for this war or against it.”
Republican leaders have successfully, though narrowly, defeated a series of war powers resolutions pertaining to several other conflicts that Trump has entered or threatened to enter. This one, however, is different.
Unlike Trump’s military campaigns against alleged drug boats or even Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, the attack on Iran represents an open-ended conflict that is already ricocheting across the region. For Republicans who are used to operating in a political party dominated by Trump and his promises of keeping the US out of foreign entanglements, the moment represented a bit of whiplash.
“War is ugly, it always has been ugly, but we’re taking out a regime that has been trying to attack us for quite some time,” said Sen. Markwayne Mullin, an Oklahoma Republican.
Meanwhile, Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who has long pushed Trump to engage overseas, argued that the widening conflict represented an opportunity for Arab and European countries to join in the fight against Iran and the militant groups it supports.
“I don’t mind people being on record as to whether or not they think this is a good idea,” he told reporters, but also argued that too much power over the military was ceded to Congress in the War Powers Act, which mandates that presidents must withdraw troops from a conflict within 90 days if there is no congressional authorization.
House vote looms
On the other side of the Capitol, House leaders were also readying for an intense debate over the war followed by a vote Thursday.
“I do believe we have the votes to defeat it, I certainly hope we do,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said after an all-member briefing on Tuesday night.
Meanwhile, House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said he expected a strong showing from Democrats in favor of the war powers resolution.
As lawmakers emerged from a closed-door briefing Tuesday night, Rep. Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, implored the Trump administration to “come to Congress” and speak directly to the American people about the rationale for the war.
His voice filled with emotion as he said, “Our young men and women’s lives are on the line.”
The legislation, known as a war powers resolution, gives lawmakers an opportunity to demand congressional approval before any further attacks are carried out. The Senate resolution and a similar bill being voted on in the House later this week face unlikely paths through the Republican-controlled Congress and would almost certainly be vetoed by Trump even if they were to pass.
Nonetheless, the votes marked a weighty moment for lawmakers. Their decisions on the five-day-old war — which Trump entered without congressional approval — could determine the fates of US military members, countless other lives and the future of the region.
“Wars without clear objectives do not remain small. They get bigger, bloodier, longer and more expensive,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer at a news conference Tuesday. “This is not a necessary war. It’s a war of choice.”
Trump administration scrambles for congressional support
After launching a surprise attack against Iran on Saturday, Trump has scrambled to win support for a conflict that Americans of all political persuasions were already wary of entering. Trump administration officials have been a frequent presence on Capitol Hill this week as they try to reassure lawmakers that they have the situation under control.
“We are not going to put American troops in harm’s way,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters in a raucous news conference at the Capitol Tuesday.
But six US military members were killed over the weekend in a drone strike in Kuwait.
Trump has also not ruled out deploying US ground troops. He has said he is hoping to end the bombing campaign within a few weeks, but his goals for the war have shifted from regime change to stopping Iran from developing nuclear capabilities to crippling its navy and missile programs.
“I think they are achieving great success with what they’ve done so far,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Tuesday, adding that what happens next in the country will be “largely up to the Iranian people.”
Almost all Republican senators were readying to vote Wednesday against the war powers resolution to halt military action, but a number still expressed hesitation at the idea of deploying troops on the ground in Iran.
“I don’t think the American people want to see troops on the ground,” said Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana, as he exited a classified briefing Tuesday. He added that Trump administration officials “left open that possibility,” but it wasn’t an option they were emphasizing.
Lawmakers to go on record
The votes in Congress this week represented potentially consequential markers of just where lawmakers stand on the war as they look ahead to midterm elections and the consequences of the conflict.
“Nobody gets to hide and give the president an easy pass or an end-run around the Constitution,” said Sen. Tim Kaine, the Virginia Democrat leading the war powers resolution. “Everybody’s got to declare whether they’re for this war or against it.”
Republican leaders have successfully, though narrowly, defeated a series of war powers resolutions pertaining to several other conflicts that Trump has entered or threatened to enter. This one, however, is different.
Unlike Trump’s military campaigns against alleged drug boats or even Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, the attack on Iran represents an open-ended conflict that is already ricocheting across the region. For Republicans who are used to operating in a political party dominated by Trump and his promises of keeping the US out of foreign entanglements, the moment represented a bit of whiplash.
“War is ugly, it always has been ugly, but we’re taking out a regime that has been trying to attack us for quite some time,” said Sen. Markwayne Mullin, an Oklahoma Republican.
Meanwhile, Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who has long pushed Trump to engage overseas, argued that the widening conflict represented an opportunity for Arab and European countries to join in the fight against Iran and the militant groups it supports.
“I don’t mind people being on record as to whether or not they think this is a good idea,” he told reporters, but also argued that too much power over the military was ceded to Congress in the War Powers Act, which mandates that presidents must withdraw troops from a conflict within 90 days if there is no congressional authorization.
House vote looms
On the other side of the Capitol, House leaders were also readying for an intense debate over the war followed by a vote Thursday.
“I do believe we have the votes to defeat it, I certainly hope we do,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said after an all-member briefing on Tuesday night.
Meanwhile, House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries said he expected a strong showing from Democrats in favor of the war powers resolution.
As lawmakers emerged from a closed-door briefing Tuesday night, Rep. Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, implored the Trump administration to “come to Congress” and speak directly to the American people about the rationale for the war.
His voice filled with emotion as he said, “Our young men and women’s lives are on the line.”
Latest updates
© 2026 SAUDI RESEARCH & PUBLISHING COMPANY, All Rights Reserved And subject to Terms of Use Agreement.