U.S. Spent Over $40 Million on Africa Deportations, Senate Democrats Question Oversight

The United States has spent more than $40 million expanding a policy of transferring deportees to third countries, including several African nations, according to a report released by Democrats on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

The report, first detailed by Semafor, outlines a network of bilateral arrangements under which migrants are sent to countries that are not their nations of origin. Lawmakers described what was once a limited diplomatic measure as an increasingly routine enforcement tool.

Payments to African Governments

According to the committee’s findings, more than $32 million in direct payments were made to five countries — Equatorial Guinea, Rwanda, Eswatini, El Salvador and Palau — in exchange for accepting deportees.

Equatorial Guinea and Rwanda each received $7.5 million, Eswatini $5.1 million, El Salvador $4.76 million and Palau $7.5 million, largely through lump-sum transfers.

As of January 2026, Rwanda had accepted seven migrants under the arrangement, Eswatini 15 and Equatorial Guinea 29, the report said.

Other African countries, including Ghana, South Sudan and Uganda, have also participated in third-country transfers, though details of their agreements were not publicly disclosed.

High Logistics Costs

Beyond direct payments, the report highlights significant transportation expenses. Military aircraft were used for deportation flights at operating costs exceeding $32,000 per hour.

Flights carrying 51 individuals to Rwanda, Eswatini and Equatorial Guinea over a seven-month period were estimated to have cost $2.5 million. Overall programme expenditures surpassed $40 million through January 2026.

Lawmakers argued that in some instances, deportees could have been returned directly to their home countries, potentially reducing costs.

Oversight Questions

The report raises concerns about compliance monitoring, stating that the State Department is not systematically tracking whether recipient governments are upholding diplomatic assurances tied to the agreements.

It describes the programme as “an expensive deterrent with no measurable benefit,” questioning both its fiscal efficiency and accountability structure.

The administration has defended the approach, arguing that third-country transfers are necessary when migrants’ home governments refuse repatriation. Officials maintain that the policy expands enforcement flexibility and diplomatic leverage.

Africa’s Strategic Calculus

For African governments, participation appears shaped by a mix of financial incentives, diplomatic engagement and broader bilateral considerations.

The migration arrangements coincide with ongoing U.S. cooperation across security, humanitarian and development initiatives on the continent. Some analysts view the agreements as raising questions about negotiating leverage, while others describe them as pragmatic decisions aligned with national interests.

With costs exceeding $40 million and oversight under scrutiny, the third-country deportation framework is likely to remain a subject of debate in Washington and across participating African capitals.