Nigeria raises alarm over proposed Trump visa ban on ECOWAS states
Nigeria has voiced strong concerns over a proposed visa ban policy reportedly being considered by the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump, which could target all member states of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).
Nigeria expressed strong concerns over a U.S. proposed travel restriction targeting ECOWAS member states.
The policy could hinder significant economic and security partnerships between West Africa and the U.S.
Reports highlight overstay rates and security issues as reasons for potential stricter measures.
The warning came from Nigeria's Minister of Foreign Affairs and Chair of the ECOWAS Mediation and Security Council, Ambassador Yusuf Tuggar, who described the potential visa ban policy as a major setback for regional integration, trade, and diplomatic engagement.
Speaking at the opening of the 54th Ordinary Session of the Mediation and Security Council at the Ministerial Level in Abuja on Wednesday, Tuggar cautioned that the proposed restrictions risk undermining years of diplomatic progress between West Africa and the United States.
" Such restrictions could stifle efforts to deepen U.S.–West Africa relations, particularly at a time when the region is ripe for economic cooperation and security collaboration," Tuggar said.
He added: ' It would be most unfortunate if it comes to pass, because we are a region of opportunities ready to do deals. We would like to do deals with the U.S., but visa restrictions are non-tariff barriers to deals. '
While highlighting the strategic potential of the region, Tuggar stressed: ' ECOWAS countries and the U.S. have a rare opportunity to create a partnership based on principles of need. We are also a strategic alternative to more distant and politically divergent energy producers. '
Trump's proposed immigration ban
In what could mark a major expansion of U.S. immigration policy, the administration of President Donald Trump is reportedly weighing the extension of its travel ban to include citizens from 36 more countries, with 25 of them located in Africa.
Earlier this month, a visa ban targeting 12 countries, with seven in Africa and the rest in the Middle East, took effect, halting new visa issuances to citizens of those nations and imposing additional restrictions on seven others.
While this proposed policy remains under consideration and has not been officially announced, sources with knowledge of the matter indicate that the Trump administration is evaluating a proposal to impose stricter immigration restrictions on several African countries, including almost all members of the ECOWAS bloc.
A classified memo points to visa overstay rates and weaknesses in national security screening processes as the primary justifications for the potential travel restrictions.
Should the plan move forward, these countries could soon face enhanced visa scrutiny or outright bans affecting specific types of travel to the United States, pending further internal review.
The document, signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio was reportedly circulated to U.S. diplomats working with the affected countries.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
22 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Yes, more and more celebrities are entering the phone business. Here's why
NEW YORK (AP) — More and more celebrities are looking to attach their names to your phone. Or rather, wireless services that could power it. From cosmetics to snacks and signature spirits, brands launched or co-owned by high-profile figures are just about everywhere you look today. But several big names are also venturing into the market for mobile virtual network operators — or MVNOs, an industry term for businesses that provide cell coverage by leasing infrastructure from bigger, more established carriers. U.S. President Donald Trump's family was the most recent to join the list with the launch of Trump Mobile this week. Here's what to know. Which big names have entered the phone business? On Monday, The Trump Organization (currently run by the president's sons Eric and Donald Jr.) unveiled Trump Mobile. The company says this new business will offer cell service, through an apparent licensing deal with 'all three major cellular carriers' in the U.S., and sell gold phones by August. Trump Mobile marks the latest in a string of new Trump-branded offerings — which already span from golden sneakers to 'God Bless the USA' bibles — despite mounting ethical concerns that the president is profiting off his position and could distort public policy for personal gain. 'This raises a real question about a conflict of interest,' said Ben Bentzin, an associate professor of instruction at The University of Texas at Austin's McCombs School of Business. As the sitting president, Trump appoints leadership for the Federal Communications Commission — and the family's new phone venture exists under this regulatory authority. All of this sets Trump Mobile apart from other big names that have recently ventured into the wireless business. Still, its launch arrives as a growing number of celebrities tap into this space. Just last week, actors Jason Bateman, Sean Hayes and Will Arnett launched SmartLess Mobile, a name that mirrors the trio's 'SmartLess' podcast. Now live across the contiguous U.S. and Puerto Rico, SmartLess Mobile runs on T-Mobile's 5G Network. Another wireless provider with ties to fame is Mint Mobile. While not launched by celebrities, Ryan Reynolds purchased an ownership stake in Mint in 2019. Mint's parent, the Ka'ena Corporation, was later acquired by T-Mobile in a deal worth up to $1.35 billion. Beyond names of famous people, well-known brands that weren't traditionally in the phone business have also got in on the action over the years — particuarly outside of the U.S., Forrester Research senior analyst Octavio Garcia Granados notes. He points to Walmart's 'Bait' mobile plan in Mexico, for example, as well as Italian soccer club AC Milan launching its own mobile SIM cards for fans. 'The MVNO market is not new,' said Garcia Granados. 'What's new is the development on how it's consumed and the (ease) for brands to launch such plans.' MVNOs have also emerged outside of high-profile brands or launch teams. Bentzin points to Straight Talk and Cricket — which are now owned by Verizon and AT&T, respectively. Still, traditional celebrity endorsements are common across the board. And in recent years, 'influencer marketing' has been 'the fastest growing area of advertising and promotion,' he notes. What are these cell services offering? Why were they launched? For Trump Mobile, the pitch seems to be all about having an 'all-American service' while also tapping into the fan base of the president. The company noted Monday that it chose to unveil Trump Mobile on the 10th anniversary of Trump launching 'his historic presidential campaign.' The name given to its flagship offer, The 47 Plan, and the $47.45 monthly fee make reference to the president's two terms. And a mock-up of the planned gold phone on the company's website shows Trump's 'Make America Great' slogan on the front screen. According to the company, Trump Mobile's 47 Plan will include unlimited calls, texts and data through partner carriers, as well as free roadside assistance and telehealth services. It also says the new phone, called the 'T1 Phone,' will be available for $499 in August — but notes that this device won't be designed or made by Trump Mobile. Still, the company emphasized that these phones will be built in the U.S. Experts have since shared skepticism about that being possible in two months. And beyond the future T1 Phone, others stress that a monthly cell service fee of just under $50 is pricey compared to other MVNO options today. 'It's not actual lower pricing. It's really trading on the fan base, if you will, of Trump,' said Bentzin. SmartLess Mobile and Mint Mobile, of course, don't carry these same political ties. And the wireless plans offered by both boast less expensive offerings. T-Mobile-owned Mint advertises 'flexible, buy-in-bulk' plans that range from $15 to $30 a month. Each option includes unlimited talk and text nationwide, but vary depending on plan length and data amount. Mint, founded in 2016, says it started 'because we'd had enough of the wireless industry's games' — and promises to help consumers avoid hidden fees. SmartLess Mobile's plans also start at $15 a month. Depending on the data amount purchased, that base fee can rise to $30 — but all of its plans similarly offer unlimited talk and text using T-Mobile's network. When launching last week, SmartLess underlined that its goal is to help people stop paying for the data they don't use, noting that the majority of data used by consumers today happens over Wi-Fi. 'Seriously, if your phone bill knew how often you're on Wi-Fi, it would be embarrassed,' Hayes said in a statement for SmartLess Mobile's June 10 launch. What's the demand? MVNOs have proven to be attractive acquisitions to big wireless carriers over the years. But whether or not the star factor promises significant demand has yet to be seen for the market's most recent entrants. For the more established Mint Mobile, Reynolds' investment is a success story. The 25% stake that the actor reportedly owned in 2023, when the company announced that it would be acquired by T-Mobile, was estimated to give him a personal windfall of over $300 million in cash and stock. And since that deal closed, Reynolds has remained in his creative role for Mint and as the face of many campaigns — helping the brand continue to attract new customers. It's no surprise that the potential of such business returns might attract other celebrities to make similar investments, Bentzin notes. Still, newer ventures are untested. And 'as the market becomes more crowded, it could be harder and harder to pick off individual consumers,' he added. Beyond a high-profile name, quality of service and what consumers can afford is also critical. 'The competition battleground here is brand and price,' Bentzin said. Still, if the marketing is right and product meets consumer needs, experts like Garcia Granados note that MVNOs can be a profitable business, for both the brands that start them and the telecommunications giants — like T-Mobile, Verizon and AT&T — offering this 'wholesale' access to their infrastructure. As a result, he said, such high-profile ventures become 'a catalyst for others to follow.' ______ AP Business Writer Bernard Condon contributed to this report from New York.
Washington Post
25 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Will the U.S. bomb Iran?
President Donald Trump supervises the installation of a new flagpole on the White House South Lawn. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images) Six days into the exchange of blows between Israel and Iran, President Donald Trump is weighing a direct attack on Iran. The decision would have massive implications — entangling the United States in yet another foreign conflict that some members of Trump's base say would be a betrayal of his 'America First' campaign promise. Trump says he's issued an 'ultimatum' to Iran to dismantle its nuclear program. How would American involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict further inflame hostilities in the region — and what could retaliation against the U.S. look like? Host Elahe Izadi speaks with Pentagon reporter Dan Lamothe and investigative reporter Carol Leonnig about this pivotal moment for Trump, the United States and the world. Today's episode was produced by Laura Benshoff with help from Emma Talkoff. It was edited by Ariel Plotnick and Maggie Penman. It was mixed by Sean Carter. Another story we're following today: The Supreme Court has ruled that states can ban some gender transition treatments for minors. In December, when the court heard arguments in U.S. v. Skrmetti, Post Reports followed a family at the center of the case. Listen to that episode here. Subscribe to The Washington Post here.
Miami Herald
25 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Will Israel-Iran war make US safer — or less safe — in long term? What poll says
Few Americans believe the Israel-Iran war will ultimately be good for U.S. and global security, according to new polling. In the latest YouGov survey, respondents were asked whether 'recent attacks by Israel and Iran on each other will make' the U.S., Israel, the Middle East and the world safer or less safe 'in the long run.' On all four counts, pluralities or majorities of respondents said they think the recent conflict will reduce safety, rather than bolster it. The survey comes after Israel launched a preemptive strike on Iran on June 13, which Israeli officials justified by saying Iran's nuclear program posed an imminent threat. Iran — which denies pursuing nuclear weapons — responded by carrying out its own missile strikes on Israel. Following this, President Donald Trump, who said he had advance knowledge of the attack, suggested he may ramp up American involvement by instructing the U.S. military to strike nuclear sites in Iran. 'I may do it, I may not do it,' Trump told reporters on June 18, according to The Hill. 'I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do.' In the poll — which sampled 3,471 U.S. adults on June 17 — just 14% of respondents said the Israel-Iran conflict will make the U.S. more safe in the future, while 37% said it will make the country less safe. When asked about Israel, responses were similar. Just 19% said the recent attacks will make the Middle Eastern nation safer, while 40% said they will reduce safety. When it came to the broader region and the world, Americans were even more pessimistic. A slim majority, 51%, said they believe the conflict will reduce safety in the Middle East, while 15% said it will bolster safety. And, on the global scale, 50% said the fighting will reduce safety, while 15% said it will increase it. Republicans were significantly more likely than Democrats to believe the Israel-Iran conflict would shore up safety in the long term, according to the poll, which has a margin of error of 2.1 percentage points. For example, 27% of GOP respondents said the war will ultimately make the U.S. safer, while 4% of Democrats and 13% of independents said the same. And 28% of Republicans said it will make the world safer, compared to 5% of Democrats and 14% of independents.
