South Sudan accused of bartering national dignity for u.s. deportees

Post Views: 4

In a move that has sparked outrage across Africa, South Sudan’s government is facing accusations of compromising national sovereignty in exchange for political favors from the United States, following revelations that Juba offered to accept deported African migrants—many of whom are not even South Sudanese.

According to a damning report published by Politico, President Salva Kiir’s administration extended an offer to the U.S. government under Donald Trump, proposing to accept a greater number of deportees in return for a series of diplomatic concessions.

These include lifting sanctions on a senior South Sudanese official, restoring access to international banking, and even legal assistance in internal political disputes, notably against Vice President Riek Machar.

The report reveals that only one of the last eight people forcibly expelled by the U.S. was South Sudanese, raising concerns about the authenticity and morality of Juba’s gesture. Critics have condemned the move as “shameful” and “humiliating,” portraying it as a betrayal of both national responsibility and regional solidarity.

“This is not about humanitarianism,” one critic noted. “It is a cynical trade, where deportees are treated as bargaining chips.”

In stark contrast, other African nations have vocally opposed America’s immigration tactics. Nigeria has officially rejected the repatriation of its citizens without due process, while South Africa has decried racial profiling of African nationals. The African Union has consistently condemned mass deportations from the U.S., emphasizing violations of international human rights conventions.

Despite these united continental stances, South Sudan appears to have chosen a path of silent compliance. The April 2025 U.S. visa ban on South Sudanese citizens—imposed due to alleged non-cooperation—was met not with protest, but with backdoor deals seeking its repeal.

Observers fear this marks a dangerous precedent. “What we see is diplomacy used not to advance public welfare, but to protect the interests of a few elites,” another analyst said. “This undermines not only national dignity but Africa’s broader position in global negotiations.”

At a time when South Sudan is still reeling from years of civil conflict, deep-rooted corruption, and economic fragility, critics argue that the government should focus on internal reform rather than leveraging foreign deportees for personal gain.

The revelations have ignited fresh debate on the continent about the ethical lines African leaders must not cross, even in the face of international pressure. For many, this is not just a South Sudanese issue—it is a test of Africa’s collective resolve to uphold dignity, sovereignty, and justice on the global stage.