logo
Is Trump planning an ‘Africa visa ban'?

Is Trump planning an ‘Africa visa ban'?

Al Jazeera4 hours ago

United States President Donald Trump could significantly expand his travel ban list in the next few weeks to include 36 more countries, 26 of which are in Africa, US media reports say, citing internal government documents.
With 10 countries already included on Trump's initial list, citizens of 36 of Africa's 54 nations could now be banned, fully or partially, from entering the US if the new list takes effect. This would make Africa the most-banned region of the world when it comes to travelling to the US.
The visa bans are part of Trump's promised immigration crackdown, which has been in motion since he took office in January, and which has already seen citizens of 19 countries in Africa and the Middle East banned or severely restricted from entering the US.
In a memorandum sent to US representatives in the affected countries on June 14, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the governments of those countries had been given 60 days to meet standards dictated by the Department of State. The memo also requested that those countries provide an initial action plan in line with meeting those measures by June 18.
That deadline has now passed. It is unclear if any of those countries have submitted the requested plans of action.
Here's what we know about the possible Africa travel bans and who could be affected:
Of the 36 new countries mentioned in the reported memo, 26 are in Africa: Angola; Benin; Burkina Faso; Cabo Verde; Cambodia; Cameroon; the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC); Djibouti; Ethiopia; Egypt; Gabon; The Gambia; Ghana; Ivory Coast; Liberia; Malawi; Mauritania; Niger; Nigeria; Sao Tome and Principe; Senegal; South Sudan; Tanzania; Uganda; Zambia; and Zimbabwe.
Others on the list are in the Caribbean, Asia, the Pacific and the Middle East: Antigua and Barbuda, Bhutan, Cambodia, Dominica, Kyrgyzstan, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Syria, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu.
Countries which fail to address concerns raised by the Trump administration adequately could be recommended for a ban as early as August, the memo says.
Seven African countries were included on Trump's first list of 12 countries completely banned from entering the US from June 4. They are Somalia, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Libya, Eritrea, Equatorial Guinea and Sudan. Three others – Sierra Leone, Burundi and Togo – were named on a separate list of seven countries which now face partial restrictions on their citizens, meaning some limited US visa categories are still open to them.
This brings the total to 36 of Africa's 54 countries on a potential ban list for travel to the US.
Saturday's memo gave a wide range of reasons for a potential ban on the countries affected. It did not provide justifications specific to each country, but cautioned that countries had been flagged for separate reasons.
Some of the countries are designated as 'sponsors of terrorism' or have citizens who were 'involved with acts of terrorism in the United States', according to one reason given. Others, as per the memo, do not have a credible 'government authority to produce reliable identity documents', have unreliable criminal records, or sell citizenship to people who do not live in their countries.
High rates of visa overstays by citizens of some countries were also cited as reasons to curb travellers, as well as a lack of cooperation by states when it comes to taking back citizens who have been deported from the US.
Affected countries could address US concerns by agreeing to accept back deportees – even those originating from other countries – or agreeing to become a 'safe third country' that will take in people seeking asylum in the US, the memo stated. Mineral-rich DRC proposed such a deal to the White House in March.
In early June, when the first travel ban list was released, Trump stated in a video message released by the White House that a recent attack on a pro-Israel rally in Boulder, Colorado, 'underscored the extreme dangers posed to our country by the entry of foreign nationals who are not properly vetted'.
Suspect Mohamed Sabry Soliman, an Egyptian national who has also lived in Kuwait, has since been arrested and charged with a federal hate crime and several other state charges. His wife and five children are presently detained by US immigration officials. Egypt is now being considered for a ban, although Kuwait is not on either list of countries facing visa bans.
This is not the first time Trump has banned citizens of other countries, which critics point out tend to be non-white and low-income nations. During his first presidential term, a controversial and highly-challenged policy, which came to be known as the 'Muslim ban', saw seven Muslim-majority countries on a red list that later expanded to include some low-income African nations. Former President Joe Biden rescinded the ban when he took office in 2021.
About two million of the US's 44 million immigrant population come from African nations, according to data from the US-based Migration Policy Institute. Nearly half of African immigrants migrated to the US after 2010, according to the US Census Bureau, and represent the fastest-growing immigrant bloc in recent years.
Many African immigrants are highly educated with one or more degrees, and represent the largest immigrant group in the labour force, the bureau reported. About 61 percent are naturalised US citizens.
Here's a breakdown of immigrant numbers by country between 1960 and 2023, according to data from the Migration Policy Institute:
Trump's travel bans are likely to cause a great deal of uncertainty for people who already live in the US, experts say.
Michelle Mittelstadt, director of communications at the Migration Policy Institute, told Al Jazeera at the time of the first travel ban announcement: 'For citizens of these countries living in the US who are not naturalised citizens, the travel ban most likely will freeze them in place, as many will be fearful that they might not be permitted re-entry if they leave the US temporarily.'
Mittelstadt added that the travel ban could split families, 'given the inability to travel legally to the US or apply for a permanent or temporary visa, as well as the immobility this will confer on many citizens of these countries who are already in the US'.
According to Statista, about 588,177 visitors from Africa travelled to the US in 2024. A historical breakdown by country is not available.
This year, no African country is on the list of the top 20 countries visiting the US, according to data from the US Department of Commerce. About 100,000 visitors have been recorded so far, from the African continent, mostly from:
Nigeria's Foreign Minister Yusuf Tuggar warned this week that the US could miss out on essential and rare earth mineral deals if it bans citizens of West African countries.
'This would be most unfortunate if it comes to pass because we are a region of opportunities ready to do deals,' Tuggar, who currently chairs the regional bloc Economic Community of West Africa's (ECOWAS) council of foreign ministers, said in a meeting with his counterparts. He cited Nigeria's reserves of oil and gas. The country is also rich in tantalite and uranium.
Sarang Shidore, director of the Global South programme at US think tank Quincy Institute, told Al Jazeera that visa bans were akin to 'building walls' between the US and targeted regions.
'Africa, particularly, is important to the United States as it is a site of natural resources, a growing market, and a talented population,' Shidore said. 'If Washington wants to restrict migration and travel from the continent, it should find other, non-militarised ways of demonstrating US commitment to stronger relations with African states.'
Trump has indeed appeared to be keen on striking deals for rare earth minerals, crucial for the manufacturing of smartphones and electric vehicle batteries.
For example, Washington and Beijing are set to sign an agreement that will see China provide rare earth elements and minerals crucial for manufacturing tech gadgets and weapons, in exchange for continued access to US schools for Chinese students, according to a social media post by Trump last week.
Last month, the US also announced an agreement with Ukraine over rare earth minerals in return for assistance in rebuilding the country once the war with Russia is over.
When the first travel ban list was announced at the start of June, Chad responded to its inclusion by suspending visas for US citizens. In a Facebook post, President Idriss Deby said: 'I have instructed the government to act in accordance with the principles of reciprocity and suspend the issuance of visas to US citizens.'
According to the most recent figures from the US Department of Homeland Security, nationals of Chad had the highest visa overstay rate, at 49.5 percent of those arriving in the country.
Other affected African nations have struck a more conciliatory tone.
Sierra Leone's Information Minister Chernor Bah said in a statement that his country was ready to cooperate with the US. 'Our attitude to this is, what more can we do? How can we collaborate with our US partners, with whom we have and believe will maintain a very good relationship,' he said.
Trump's initial proclamation in early June said Sierra Leone, which is now subject to partial restrictions, 'has historically failed to accept back its removable nationals'.
Somalia's ambassador to the US, Dahir Hassan, said the East African country wanted to work with the US. 'Somalia values its longstanding relationship with the United States and stands ready to engage in dialogue to address the concerns raised,' he said.
Trump's proclamation described Somalia as 'a terrorist safe haven' and stated: 'Somalia lacks a competent or cooperative central authority for issuing passports or civil documents and it does not have appropriate screening and vetting measures.'
The African Union, meanwhile, in a statement on June 5, called on the US to adopt a more constructive approach and to dialogue with African nations to maintain what it said were historically strong ties.
'The African Union respectfully calls upon the US Administration to consider adopting a more consultative approach and to engage in constructive dialogue with the countries concerned. The Commission appeals for transparent communication, and where necessary, collaborative efforts to address any underlying issues that may have informed this decision,' the AU statement said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Has Trump put off joining the Israel-Iran conflict for two weeks?
Has Trump put off joining the Israel-Iran conflict for two weeks?

Al Jazeera

time23 minutes ago

  • Al Jazeera

Has Trump put off joining the Israel-Iran conflict for two weeks?

Trump appeared to delay US action on Iran for two weeks on Thursday, but is it just a negotiation tactic? United States President Donald Trump will decide Washington's course of action in relation to the Israel-Iran conflict in two weeks' time, the White House said on Thursday. Speculation has been rising this week that the US could decide to assist its longstanding ally, Israel, in strikes against Iran, which it claims are designed to neutralise Iran's nuclear programme. In particular, Israel wants the US to provide 'bunker buster' bombs, which may be able to penetrate deep within the mountain in northwest Iran, where the Fordow nuclear facility is located. This comes after a week of Trump shifting his position on the conflict. Here is what we know: What has Trump said about potential US action in Iran? On Thursday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt shared what she described as a direct quote from the US president with reporters: 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks.' How has Trump changed his position on the Iran-Israel conflict? When Israel first attacked Iran late on June 13, the Trump administration clearly stated that it had not been involved, calling Israel's attack 'unilateral action'. It has become clear since then, however, that the US did have knowledge of the attacks in advance. Trump also said he believed Iran was 'very close' to having a nuclear weapon during the Group of Seven (G7) summit in Canada this week, contradicting his own US intelligence reports. This marked a shift from his position in May, when he made public statements that Tehran and Washington were close to a nuclear deal. Advertisement On Wednesday, Trump refused to say whether the US would join the conflict. 'I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do,' he told reporters outside the White House. Finally, on Thursday, Trump appeared to give a two-week deadline for talks with Iran to succeed before the US would take action. Sign up for Al Jazeera Americas Coverage Newsletter US politics, Canada's multiculturalism, South America's geopolitical rise—we bring you the stories that matter. Subscribe Your subscription failed. Please try again. Please check your email to confirm your subscription By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy protected by reCAPTCHA Does this mean Trump has delayed a US attack on Iran for two weeks? No. It also does not necessarily mean the US will attack Iran at all. Leavitt remained ambiguous on what could happen after two weeks. The press secretary said: 'The president is always interested in a diplomatic solution … he is a peacemaker-in-chief. He is the peace-through-strength president. And so, if there's a chance for diplomacy, the president's always going to grab it. But he's not afraid to use strength as well.' But Mona Yacoubian, senior adviser and director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), said that while two weeks would give time for more negotiations with Iran, it would also provide the US with time to 'flow in additional forces should it decide to join Israel in the conflict'. For now, it is impossible to say which of these two possibilities is more likely – or if the 'two weeks' mentioned by Trump is even a deadline at all. 'I don't even know if President Trump knows what he wants,' Iranian American analyst Negar Mortazavi told Al Jazeera. 'He campaigned as the president of peace … he promised he's going to end conflicts. Russia-Ukraine hasn't ended. Gaza has escalated, and he just let the third big Middle East war, which looks like a regime-change war, start under his watch. So, he says one thing. He does another.' Others believe Trump's 'two weeks' comment is a negotiation tactic to apply pressure on Iran during talks. Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council, told Al Jazeera that Trump could be attempting to build leverage with threats to strong-arm Iran into accepting his demands of 'total surrender'. 'I think he's trying to present himself as this madman who is unpredictable, and in so doing, he can then insist on this very hard line that Iran has refused to accept for decades of full dismantlement of its [nuclear] enrichment programme,' Abdi told Al Jazeera. 'The delay certainly could be part of a broader negotiating strategy which exploits Iran's weakened position as a result of wide-ranging military strikes to extract more substantial concessions from Iran on the nuclear issue and potentially on other points of contention as well, for example its ballistic missiles programme,' Yacoubian said. Advertisement ⁠'It's extremely difficult to predict what will happen next,' she added. 'President Trump's idiosyncratic negotiating strategy alongside his instinctual, 'from-the-gut' decision-making approach underscores the unpredictability of the coming days – which may well be the point!' Has Trump declared deadlines before, and has he stuck to them? In the past, Trump has assigned similar timelines relating to Iran's nuclear programme, the Russia-Ukraine war and global trade tariffs. But he does not always stick to them. 'Imposing deadlines stands as perhaps the one predictable element of Trump's approach to finding solutions to complex problems,' said Yacoubian. 'Setting explicit deadlines has characterised Trump's negotiating style in several realms, from Ukraine to politically sensitive domestic challenges.' Iran-Israel conflict In the lead-up to the current conflict, Trump says he gave Iran a 60-day deadline to negotiate an agreement over its nuclear programme, but talks continued beyond its expiry, Yacoubian noted. In the end, it was Israel which took action, launching a series of strikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites on June 13. Russia-Ukraine war Since the beginning of his presidency in January this year, Trump has been attempting to lead peace negotiations to bring an end to the war in Ukraine. On May 28, Trump set a two-week deadline to determine whether his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, was willing to end the conflict. Trump told reporters then: 'Within two weeks. We're gonna find out whether or not [Putin is] tapping us along or not. And if he is, we'll respond a little bit differently.' As the two-week window approached an end, the New York Post asked Trump in a podcast whether Putin cared about Russia losing thousands of soldiers in Ukraine. He said, 'I'm starting to think maybe he doesn't.' Since the two-week window ended, Russia and Ukraine do not appear to be any closer to a peace agreement. But Trump has not signalled a shift in US policy towards Russia despite his previous threat. A report by the Reuters news agency, published on Tuesday, further claimed that the Trump administration had disbanded an interagency working group aimed at placing pressure on Russia to speed up talks with Ukraine. Reuters cited three unnamed US officials in its report. The existence of this working group had not been made public. Trade tariffs Trump has also announced pauses and delays to his on-again-off-again trade tariffs first imposed on trading partners of the US in April. In April, he announced a 90-day pause for all its tariff targets except China, with which the US reached a trade deal earlier this month. The tariff pause is set to expire on July 8. However, on June 11, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told lawmakers that Trump was likely to push back the July 8 deadline.

Project 2025: Governance reform or Culture War battle plan?
Project 2025: Governance reform or Culture War battle plan?

Al Jazeera

time2 hours ago

  • Al Jazeera

Project 2025: Governance reform or Culture War battle plan?

Project 2025 became a flashpoint during the 2024 presidential campaign. The sweeping conservative policy blueprint aims to overhaul the federal government and reshape United States society. How closely is President Donald Trump following its direction? And how much does it test the limits of the Constitution? Marc Lamont Hill talks to Paul Dans, the former director of Project 2025 at the Heritage Foundation.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store