Africa’s reaction to President Donald Trump’s migrant relocation plan has been far from uniform, with some governments signaling willingness to cooperate while others voice sharp resistance.
- Africa’s response to President Trump’s migrant relocation plan is divided, reflecting competing diplomatic and domestic priorities.
- Reports suggested an agreement with Uganda to accept certain deportees, but Ugandan officials denied its existence.
- Several African nations expressed sovereignty concerns and criticized the policy as exploitative or unconstitutional.
- Sentiments among African leaders vary, showcasing frustration with U.S. transactional diplomacy.
The divided response highlights the continent’s competing priorities, balancing diplomatic ties with Washington against domestic concerns over sovereignty, security, and human rights.
Reports from CBS, shared by the BBC, suggested that Washington had secured a new deportation agreement with Uganda, under which Kampala would receive migrants who had sought asylum at the US–Mexico border, including some from African and Asian countries.
According to the report, Uganda was said to have agreed to accept deportees without criminal histories, though the number it would eventually host was left undefined.
But Ugandan authorities have since denied the existence of any such agreement.
Henry Oryem Okello, the country’s state minister for foreign affairs, told Reuters that Kampala had not signed a deal with the US and lacked the infrastructure to accommodate deported migrants.
“To the best of my knowledge we have not reached such an agreement. We do not have the facilities and infrastructure to accommodate such illegal immigrants in Uganda. So, we cannot take in such illegal immigrants,” Oryem stated.
His rejection comes as Washington faces growing criticism for attempting to relocate convicted felons and rejected asylum seekers to countries that are not their places of origin.
With the latest development, Uganda has joined the growing list of African countries that have pushed back against the U.S. deportation plan, signaling mounting resistance to Washington’s efforts to secure third-party hosts for deported migrants.
African nations adopt divided approaches
As the Trump administration intensifies efforts to deport convicted migrants to third-party countries, several African nations have pushed back, asserting sovereignty and rejecting what many view as an exploitative framework. However, some others have acepted the policy.
Earlier this year, the U.S. deported foreign convicts to South Sudan and Eswatini, sparking condemnation from rights groups.
Uganda’s firm denial now places it alongside other African states resisting Washington’s controversial program.
Nigeria: A Resounding No
In July 2025, Nigeria’s Foreign Minister Yusuf Tuggar rejected U.S. overtures outright, insisting that his country would not accept “Venezuelan prisoners into Nigeria.”
His stance, backed by Nigeria’s regional influence, underscores growing frustration with what analysts call Washington’s transactional diplomacy.
Libya: Both Governments Refuse
Libya’s rival authorities—both the UN-backed western administration and eastern militias—denied any deal with the U.S., stressing that deportees would not be accepted.
U.S. court rulings have also warned that such deportations would be unconstitutional.
Rwanda: From Talks to Agreement
Rwanda initially confirmed holding early discussions with U.S. officials, stressing that no deal had been finalized. However, by August 2025 Kigali announced a formal agreement to accept up to 250 deported migrants, with provisions for vetting and support services including housing, healthcare, and workforce training.
South Sudan
Last month, the United States confirmed it had completed the deportation of eight men to South Sudan, a day after a U.S. judge cleared the way for President Donald Trump’s administration to send them to the violence-hit African country.
Eswatini
In July 2025, the United States deported five men from Vietnam, Jamaica, Cuba, Yemen, and Laos to Eswatini under its third-country deportation policy. The men, convicted of crimes in the U.S., were placed in solitary confinement upon arrival, with Eswatini stating they would later be repatriated through the United Nations.
The move drew strong criticism from rights advocates and civic leaders, who called it opaque and unlawful, warning that it compromised both the men’s rights and Eswatini’s sovereignty.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said on Saturday that the men were deported the previous day—U.S. Independence Day—after losing a last-minute legal bid to halt their transfer.
Africa’s divided stance on Trump’s deportation plan reveals the complexity of migration politics, where international pressure and domestic realities often collide
