Why the Government should rethink the emergency visa brake on study visas
This blog was kindly authored by Sasha Roseneil, Vice-Chancellor and President, University of Sussex.
The UK Government’s recent announcement of an ‘emergency visa brake’ on study visas for university applicants from Afghanistan, Cameroon, Myanmar and Sudan has profound consequences, not only for those who will be denied the opportunity to study in the UK, but for the UK’s global reputation and soft power and for the prospect of international development and progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals in four of the countries most in need of global support to achieve them.
The suspension has been introduced in response to a rise in asylum claims from these countries (up 470% between 2021 and 2025). But the decision raises serious concerns for prospective and current international students, who have often made personal and financial sacrifices to study in the UK and who contribute positively to our academic community and wider society.
This is particularly so for those who were recently shortlisted for the government’s prestigious postgraduate Chevening Scholarships, and who have now been told that the scheme is ‘closed indefinitely.’ In the six years to 2024, there were 119 Afghan recipients of these scholarships, 58 from Cameroon, 65 from Myanmar, and 101 from Sudan. For the ‘outstanding emerging leaders’ from these countries, the scholarship provided the opportunity to expand their knowledge and to develop advanced skills, in order to return to their countries of origin to drive positive change.
The impact of this policy will be particularly severe for women. In Afghanistan, girls have been excluded from secondary education and women from higher education for over four years. For many Afghan women, the opportunity to study abroad is one of the last remaining pathways to education, professional development and personal safety. The suspension of study visas for Afghan nationals, therefore, raises urgent questions about whether an Equalities Impact Assessment has been undertaken, and how the Government has considered the sex-equality consequences of this decision. The reopening of the Chevening scheme to students residing in Afghanistan in 2024 was described by alumni as a ‘beacon of hope’ after years of exclusion. The visa brake removes one of the last remaining avenues for Afghan women to access higher education, develop leadership skills, and contribute to the future of their country.
The University of Sussex has an exceptional and distinguished history of educating students from countries undergoing profound social and political transitions. Generations of Sussex alumni have returned to their home countries to contribute to democratic renewal, peace and institution‑building, and social and economic reform. This includes heads of state and other senior leaders in society and industry, with the well-documented role played by Sussex in supporting students who went on to lead South Africa’s post-apartheid transition one particularly powerful example of how educational exchange contributes to long‑term societal transformation.
As the world’s leading institution for Development Studies – ranked 1st in the world for Development Studies in the QS World University Rankings by Subject 2025 for the ninth consecutive year – Sussex attracts applications from excellent and highly motivated students from across the global south and from conflict regions, including from Afghanistan, Cameroon, Myanmar, and Sudan. They are seeking to expand their knowledge at a postgraduate level and to develop advanced skills in order to return to their countries of origin to drive positive change. Their presence enriches our academic community, expands the horizons and global understanding of UK students, and strengthens the UK’s international connections. Because of our reputation for Development Studies, Sussex is one of the most popular destinations for Chevening Scholars, and many of our Chevening alumni have gone on to hold senior positions in government and public service in their home countries. Removing access to UK universities for outstanding students from these countries risks undermining this powerful force for peace and democracy, and weakening the UK’s influence in regions where constructive engagement is essential.
The government is right to seek to protect the integrity of the immigration system, but it can do this without closing off legitimate educational pathways for students who seek to contribute to the development of their home countries, and who invariably return home with deep respect and fondness for our country. I urge the government to work with universities to ensure that the UK remains open, outward-looking and committed to attracting global talent in ways that align with national priorities. Universities such as Sussex stand ready to work constructively to ensure that the UK continues to play a leading role in global education, international development and peace-building.
Comments
Jonathan Alltimes says:
Given the status of the author, the use of rhetoric which obviously overstates the argument indicates a meaning other than that ostensibly intended. By implication or possibly insinuation, the vice-chancellor argues, that the government does not “work with universities to ensure that the UK remains open, outward-looking and committed to attracting global talent in ways that align with national priorities.” Is the UK not open and outward-looking? The purpose of educational grants are many, but the purpose of the Chevening scholarship programme is unclear and it originated in a time when the competition for global talent was not a concern of government policy, so it is not necessarily aligned to the current government policy for global talent visas. As it is not stated here, I assume the vice-chancellor and Universities UK have not made a representation direct to the British Council, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, and the Home Office arguing for an exception to the rule and received a response. They should do so. Have students funded by Chevening scholarships, fellowships and any other grant from the British Council or any other government organisation, claimed asylum while using a study visa and if so, what is the prevalence by country and year?
Reply
Replies
Mubita Simataa says:
You ask important questions, Jonathan.
Here are some of my thoughts in response:
You ask, “Is the UK not open and outward-looking?” to the implication or possibly insinuation, the vice-chancellor argues, that the government does not “work with universities to ensure that the UK remains open, outward-looking and committed to attracting global talent in ways that align with national priorities.” My interpretation of this statement, however, was not that the UK is closed (the phrase “remains open” is doing the heavy lifting). Rather, the vice-chancellor is urging the government to ensure that its policies do not eventually render the country closed and inward-looking.
Regarding the Chevening scholarship, I agree with the core argument that it may not be aligned with current government policy, but I find your claim that its purpose is unclear and that it originated in a time when “the competition for global talent was not a concern of government policy” overstated. The truth is that Chevening’s purpose has remained consistent since its inception in 1983. The UK government has used it as a tool of soft power, producing over 20 heads of state and 57,000 influential alumni who have served Britain’s interests as a long-term diplomatic investment abroad. It is also factual to claim that, since Chevening was established specifically in response to the UK government’s decision to increase tuition fees for international students, it was a government policy concern to ensure that the UK would not lose its competitive edge in attracting the world’s best and brightest minds.
Additionally, it is my opinion that whether students funded by Chevening have claimed asylum or not should not be a contentious issue. The issue should be whether or not those asylum claims are genuine. It goes without saying that individuals from the 4 countries under the “visa brake” do not account for the most asylum seekers overall. They are among the most likely to claim asylum after arriving on a student visa with genuine claims due to conditions in their home countries. For very good reasons, almost everyone who applies for asylum from these countries is potentially going to be a genuine refugee. So, while I agree that the UK government is right to seek to protect the integrity of the immigration system, closing off the student visa route might eventually become a double-edged sword because people with genuine asylum claims from these four countries will still be more likely to find their way to the UK through more dangerous means (i.e. “the boats”).
Reply
Add comment