Uganda's Migrant Deal: A New Chapter
By Darius Spearman (africanelements)
Support African Elements at patreon.com/africanelements and hear recent news in a single playlist. Additionally, you can gain early access to ad-free video content.
Uganda's Agreement with the U.S.
Uganda has recently made a significant agreement with the United States to accept deported migrants. This deal comes with specific conditions that Uganda has laid out. For instance, a primary condition is that the migrants must not have criminal records (aljazeera.com). This stipulation aims to ensure that individuals entering Uganda through this program are not those who have committed serious offenses.
Furthermore, Uganda has stated it will refuse to accept unaccompanied minors (aljazeera.com). This decision likely reflects concerns about the specific care and resources required for children traveling without guardians. In addition, Uganda has expressed a preference for migrants of African nationalities (aljazeera.com). The Ugandan Ministry of Foreign Affairs has confirmed that the deal has been “concluded,” even though the specific details are still being worked out (aljazeera.com). This agreement marks a new chapter in international migration policies, particularly for African nations.
The “Third-Country” Deportation Program
This agreement places Uganda as the latest African nation to participate in the Trump administration's “third-country” deportation program. This program involves the United States deporting individuals to a country that is neither their country of origin nor the country from which they initially entered the U.S. (abc.net.au). This strategy is often used when the U.S. cannot deport individuals to their home countries due to various reasons, such as a lack of diplomatic relations, security concerns, or the individual's country of origin refusing to accept them.
Rwanda has also agreed to accept up to 250 deportees from the United States (spectrumlocalnews.com). The Rwandan government has stated that their decision is partly due to their societal values of reintegration and rehabilitation, as nearly every Rwandan family has experienced displacement (scmp.com). Under the agreement with Rwanda, Rwanda retains the ability to approve each individual proposed for resettlement (scmp.com). Approved individuals in Rwanda will receive workforce training, healthcare, and accommodation support to help them integrate into one of the fastest-growing economies (scmp.com).
Deportations to Other African Nations
The U.S. has already deported migrants to other African nations, including those deemed dangerous by the U.S. State Department. For example, thirteen men described as “dangerous criminals” were deported to Eswatini (formerly Swaziland) and South Sudan last month (aljazeera.com). It is important to note that the U.S. State Department deems South Sudan too dangerous for Americans to travel to (aljazeera.com).
A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) referred to the eight migrants deported to South Sudan as “sickos” and “barbaric,” stating they all had criminal records (aljazeera.com). The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the deportation to South Sudan to proceed in late June (aljazeera.com). A human rights lawyer in Eswatini has challenged the legality of detaining these men indefinitely, arguing they are being denied legal representation despite having served their U.S. sentences (abc.net.au). While Uganda has stated it will only accept migrants without criminal records, the U.S. has previously deported individuals with criminal backgrounds to other African countries, raising questions about the consistency and verification of such conditions. A human rights lawyer in Eswatini has taken authorities to court, alleging that men deported from the U.S. are being denied legal representation and are being held indefinitely in a maximum-security prison despite having served their criminal sentences in the U.S. (usnews.com).
African Nations Accepting US Deportees
Trump Administration's Deportation Goals
The Trump administration is actively seeking more such deals with African countries as part of a broader effort to deport millions of undocumented immigrants. President Donald Trump's administration aims to deport millions of immigrants in the U.S. illegally (trt.global). The U.S. is seeking more deals with African countries to deport people they say entered the country illegally (spectrumlocalnews.com). The U.S. Supreme Court gave the green light to efforts to deport migrants to countries other than their homeland in June (aljazeera.com).
Human rights groups have expressed concerns that these removals could violate international law (aljazeera.com). These concerns often revolve around the treatment of deportees, their access to legal representation, and the conditions of their detention. Eswatini, one of the countries accepting U.S. deportees, is an absolute monarchy where political parties are effectively banned, and authorities are accused of violently suppressing pro-democracy movements (usnews.com). The U.S. State Department advises increased caution when visiting Eswatini due to crime and civil unrest, and its 2023 Human Rights Report noted “credible reports of: arbitrary or unlawful killings, including extrajudicial killings; torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment by the government” (washingtonmonthly.com).
Uganda's Existing Asylum Seeker Population
Uganda already hosts a significant number of asylum seekers from neighboring countries. Currently, Uganda hosts around two million asylum seekers (aljazeera.com). These asylum seekers primarily come from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan, and South Sudan (aljazeera.com). This existing large refugee population highlights Uganda's long-standing role in providing refuge to those fleeing conflict and instability in the region.
The influx of new deportees from the U.S. could potentially strain Uganda's resources and infrastructure, which are already supporting a substantial number of asylum seekers. The legal status and rights of deportees once they arrive in countries like Uganda are a significant concern, especially given reports of indefinite detention and lack of legal representation in other receiving nations. A human rights lawyer in Eswatini has filed a court case alleging that U.S. deportees are being denied legal representation and are being held indefinitely in a maximum-security prison, despite having served their criminal sentences in the U.S. (usnews.com). This situation raises important questions about the protections and support that will be afforded to those deported to Uganda.
Uganda's Current Asylum Seeker Population
- Democratic Republic of the Congo
- Sudan
- South Sudan
The Broader Implications for African Nations
The agreements between the U.S. and African nations like Uganda and Rwanda signify a troubling shift in U.S.-Africa relations, as noted by Nigeria's Foreign Minister Yusuf Tuggar, who stated Nigeria rejected such a deal (issafrica.org). The U.S. has been “mounting considerable pressure” on African countries to accept deportees (issafrica.org). This pressure raises questions about the sovereignty and agency of African nations in these deals, especially when considering the human rights implications.
The lack of transparency surrounding these agreements is also a significant concern. For instance, the U.S. authorities did not name the men deported to Eswatini or specify if they were deported directly from prison or detained in another way (usnews.com). This secrecy makes it difficult for human rights organizations and the public to monitor the treatment of deportees and ensure their rights are protected. As more African nations are approached for such deals, it becomes crucial to scrutinize the terms and conditions to prevent potential human rights abuses and ensure fair treatment for all individuals involved.
Key Concerns Regarding U.S. Deportation Deals
Concerns about potential violations of international law, especially regarding treatment, legal representation, and detention conditions in receiving countries with questionable human rights records.
Secrecy surrounding the terms of the agreements and the identities of deportees makes monitoring and accountability difficult.
New deportees could further strain the resources of African nations already hosting large numbers of asylum seekers.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Darius Spearman has been a professor of Black Studies at San Diego City College since 2007. He is the author of several books, including Between The Color Lines: A History of African Americans on the California Frontier Through 1890. You can visit Darius online at africanelements.org.
