Post by Dalia Yousif

The UK Government moved to restrict student visas for Sudan, arguing that international students are using study visas as a pathway to claim asylum. But when you look at the data on how asylum seekers actually enter the UK, the justification becomes difficult to understand. The chart below shows the percentage of asylum seekers who entered the UK using visas or other legal leave before later claiming asylum. Look at the countries with the highest visa-entry rates (not banned): Pakistan – 89% Nigeria – 87% Bangladesh – 85% Iran – 23% Sudan 10–13% Now compare that with Sudan. For Sudan, the share of asylum seekers entering through visas is only around 10–13%. The overwhelming majority did not arrive through visas at all. So the claim that Sudanese students are abusing the student visa system does not align with what the data actually shows. This raises a serious question: why target Sudanese students? Sudan is currently experiencing one of the largest humanitarian crises in the world, with millions displaced by war. Restricting educational pathways for Sudanese students does not solve migration pressures. It simply shuts doors for young people seeking stability through education. Even more troubling is the broader principle. Since when did education policy become a tool of anti-immigration politics? Universities should not become instruments of migration control. Student visas exist to promote education, research collaboration, and global knowledge exchange. Policies that contradict the evidence risk undermining both fair immigration policy and the UK’s global academic reputation. And frankly, decisions like this are easier to impose on countries like Sudan because the government knows there will be little diplomatic pushback from a state weakened by conflict. Evidence should guide policy. Not politics. Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office Chevening Awards UK Home Office Chatham House