Ever wonder what happens when a country deports migrants to nations they’ve never known? The US is expanding this controversial program to Africa, with Rwanda, Uganda, and Eswatini now involved in secretive deals. The implications are far-reaching and raise serious questions about human rights and international agreements. What’s the true cost of these policies?

The United States is significantly expanding its controversial program of migrant deportations to African nations, often to countries where these individuals have no prior ties, a policy shift raising profound humanitarian and ethical questions regarding US immigration policy.

This past month, Rwanda officially became the third African nation to accept deportees from the U.S. under this expanded initiative. A Rwandan government spokesperson confirmed the arrival of seven individuals earlier in the month, a development that remained largely unannounced to the public at the time, underscoring the secretive nature of these migrant deportations Africa.

Rwanda’s agreement mirrors similar secretive deals previously struck with two other African countries, which have already received a small number of U.S. deportees. Uganda, another East African nation, has also confirmed an agreement in principle to participate in the program, signaling a growing network for the Rwanda Uganda deal and other African diplomacy efforts.

Following their arrival in Rwanda, representatives from the United Nations’ migration agency and local social services are reportedly engaging with the seven deportees. While three have expressed a desire to return to their home countries, the remaining four have indicated their wish to establish new lives within Rwanda, highlighting the complex personal circumstances and humanitarian concerns involved.

The U.S.-Rwanda arrangement draws parallels to a similar, yet ultimately failed, 2022 deal between the United Kingdom and Rwanda concerning asylum seekers, which was subsequently ruled unlawful by Britain’s Supreme Court. Such international law partnerships consistently face criticism from human rights advocates globally.

Eswatini, a nation bordering Rwanda, has also agreed to accept U.S. deportees, albeit with stipulations against individuals with criminal records or unaccompanied minors. Meanwhile, the U.S. continues efforts to deport a high-profile individual, whose case has garnered significant media attention, to Uganda, further underscoring the legal and logistical complexities of these transfers under current US immigration policy.

The motivations for African nations to engage in these agreements remain largely undisclosed, though potential benefits could include improved diplomatic relations with the U.S. and various forms of aid, influencing African foreign policy. However, human rights lawyers, like Uganda’s Nicholas Opio, voice strong opposition, arguing that such programs sacrifice human beings for political expediency and raise serious ethical humanitarian concerns.

Previous incidents illustrate the harsh realities of these migrant deportations Africa, as seen when eight men from diverse nationalities were sent to Eswatini after their deportations faced legal challenges, leading to their prolonged confinement in a converted shipping container in Djibouti, further raising questions about international law and human dignity.

The persistent lack of transparency surrounding the welfare and whereabouts of these deportees, even after their arrival in receiving nations, remains a significant point of concern for international observers. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security categorizes some as violent criminals whose home countries refused repatriation, yet the details of their new living conditions often remain shrouded in secrecy, complicating oversight of US immigration policy.