Africa Pushes Back Against U.S. Plan to Deport Non-Citizens to the Continent

Washington/Kampala: Widespread protests have erupted across several African nations following a new executive order signed by U.S. President Donald Trump, aimed at deporting undocumented immigrants. While the Trump administration insists the move is essential for ensuring national security, forcing African countries to accept non-citizen deportees has triggered intense controversy and diplomatic backlash.

 Bilateral Agreements and African Union’s Strong Rebuke

As some nations refused to take back their deported citizens, the Trump administration began pursuing bilateral agreements with African governments to facilitate repatriations. The African Union (AU) has condemned the move, warning that such unilateral deals could effectively turn the continent into a “dumping ground” for unwanted migrants.

Livingstone Ssewanyana, Executive Director of Uganda’s Foundation for Human Rights Initiative (FHRI), sharply criticized the U.S. policy.

“African countries should not bear the burden of America’s immigration challenges. Among those being deported are both dangerous offenders and innocent individuals denied due legal assistance. Instead of shifting the problem to Africa, the U.S. should resolve it within its own borders,” Ssewanyana asserted.

 A Threat to National Sovereignty

Reports indicate that Ghana, Rwanda, South Sudan, and Eswatini have already agreed to receive deported migrants, while Uganda has also accepted a limited number. Kenya is reportedly considering a similar arrangement. However, Nigeria has openly opposed the policy, accusing Washington of using visa restrictions and tariff pressures to coerce African states into compliance.

According to Dr. Ronald Kalyango Sebba, a migration expert at Makerere University, several governments appear willing to cooperate in exchange for U.S. “goodwill and economic incentives.”

“These third-party deportation deals are both unlawful and degrading. Sending individuals, many branded as criminals, to nations they do not belong to violates their rights and undermines the sovereignty of African states pressured into compliance,” Dr. Sebba emphasized.

Complicity in Human Rights Violations

Dr. Josephine Wanjiru of Kenyatta University warned that agreeing to serve as “third-party resettlement zones” places African countries in a position of submission to foreign pressure.

“Many deportees are asylum seekers who have not exhausted all legal remedies. Forcing them into countries with which they have no ties is a violation of international law and tantamount to complicity in human rights abuses,” she stated.

She cautioned that using deported individuals as bargaining chips in bilateral negotiations represents a grave erosion of human dignity and justice.

 The Double Standards in U.S. Visa and Trade Policy

Dr. Boniface Muka of Kenyatta University argued that African nations are compromising their border control, judicial independence, and migration policy autonomy in exchange for trade benefits and tariff concessions from Washington.

“It is hypocritical for the U.S. to ask Africa’s help in solving its immigration problems while simultaneously imposing harmful trade and visa policies that cripple African economies,” he said.

Dr. Muka called on African governments to ensure strict legal safeguards for deportees, including access to legal counsel and human rights protections, before entering into any such agreements.