Trump Administration Expands Third-Country Deportation Deals to African Nations

The Mechanics of “Transactional” Deportations

As part of a broader pledge to carry out the largest deportation operation in American history, the U.S. government has secured agreements with at least 34 countries to accept individuals who are not their own citizens. The strategy is frequently employed when the Department of Homeland Security finds it impracticable, inadvisable, or impossible to deport migrants directly to their home nations.

Analysts describe the administration’s approach as very transactional, noting that Washington often links these agreements to security incentives, aid packages, or the lifting of visa restrictions. According to African Business, many African states have entered into these pacts to avoid economic penalties.

Legal Challenges and Human Rights Concerns in Ghana and Eswatini

The program has faced intense scrutiny from international legal groups. In Ghana, a coalition of rights organizations filed a lawsuit in the ECOWAS Court of Justice, alleging that the country’s secret agreement with the U.S. violates the principle of non-refoulement. As The Africa Report detailed, the lawsuit claims that migrants—many of whom were granted legal protection from deportation by U.S. judges due to fears of persecution—have been detained in military facilities and airport holding cells upon arrival in Ghana before being forcibly moved to other jurisdictions.

Eswatini has become another focal point for the strategy. The kingdom has accepted multiple groups of deportees, some of whom remain in a maximum security prison. While the U.S. government maintains that these individuals are uniquely barbaric and pose safety risks, Tricia McLaughlin, an assistant secretary at the U.S. Homeland Security Department, defended the transfers by stating, this flight took individuals so uniquely barbaric that their home countries refused to take them back.

The Human Cost: Families in Limbo

For the individuals caught in the system, the uncertainty of their destination creates a precarious existence. Alisa Ramdial Shahib has been held in the Chase County Detention Center in Kansas since March. Despite having a withholding of removal status, she remains in custody while the government searches for a third country to accept her. Her lawyer, Maya King, noted that her client’s situation is complicated by prior drug convictions, which bar her from legal status despite her long-term residence in the U.S. and marriage to a U.S. citizen.

The diplomatic impact of these deals is also creating regional tension. Uganda received its first flight of deportees, a move condemned by the Uganda Law Society as an undignified, harrowing and dehumanising process.

Uncertainty and Future Diplomatic Friction

As litigation continues to move through courts in Ghana, Eswatini, and the United States, the central question remains whether these third-country removals can be reconciled with international protections for asylum seekers. With no public disclosure of the terms for many of these agreements, the legal and humanitarian status of individuals remains uncertain.