Article: https://www.rfi.fr/en/africa/20250911-ghana-becomes-fifth-african-nation-to-take-in-us-deportees
Ghana has agreed to accept West Africans who are being deported from the United States. President John Mahama confirmed that 14 people, including Nigerians and one Gambian, had already arrived in Ghana prior to being sent to their home countries. Ghana was requested by the US to accept third-party nationals because West Africans do not need visas to enter Ghana. Ghana now the fifth African nation, including Eswatini, Rwanda, South Sudan, and Uganda, that have signed similar agreements with Washington. These deportations are occurring amidst strained US-Ghana relations, where Washington recently imposed tariffs on Ghanaian exports and restricted visas to single-entry, three-month stays. The broader context includes President Trump’s vows to increase deportations, with deportees also sent to Panama, El Salvador, and other nations. While the agreements help slow down the US migrant population, they also raise questions of sovereignty, regional solidarity, and the treatment of deportees, most many of whom are sent back without full legal hearings in the US.
This article is important because it illustrates how U.S. immigration policies have far beyond its borders, directly affecting countries in Africa like Ghana. The decision to accept deportees reflects Ghana’s willingness to cooperate with Washington, perhaps motivated by economic ties, trade considerations, and diplomatic pressure. The agreement raises issues of sovereignty and fairness, as Ghana is absorbing people who are not citizens of Ghana. Historically, U.S. policy has been to shift the burden of migration to poorer nations, reinforcing power imbalances. For the nation, this may set a precedent- other West African countries could be compelled to open their borders as well. In the long run, this could strain local resources, complicate regional migration policies, and spark debates about national responsibility for displaced populations. For Ghana, cooperation signals pragmatism but may complicate its sovereignty and public opinion. Different stakeholders will likely respond differently. The US government regards such arrangements as a victory for its stricter immigration policies. Ghana presents itself as a cooperative regional actor, ensuring stable relations with the US while placing priority on solidarity with West Africans. For deportees, however, the deals create instability, with many being suddenly deported without proper hearings. Regional bodies like ECOWAS may see this as fitting into its free-movement framework, but civil society groups may protest human rights concerns about the fairness of deportations. Local populations in Ghana may also worry about economic and security impacts, shaping domestic debate on the issue.
This case is most directly connected to our study of ethnonationalism and sovereignty. Deportations bring out tensions of national identity over regional belonging. Ghana is justifying acceptance of deportees in the spirit of West African solidarity, a regional identity that transcends borders. Yet, ethnonationalist attitudes may repel outsiders as economic or cultural drains. Trump’s US message also carries traces of ethnonationalism, as he appeals to a vision of America that excludes migrants.. This event illustrates how ethnonationalism influences both domestic and foreign policy, shaping the way nations negotiate immigration. It uncovers the tension between inclusion, regional unity, and exclusion of outsiders.