Eswatini Faces Backlash Over U.S. Deportation Deal: “This Is Not Diplomacy—It’s Human Trafficking”
As the U.S. government ramps up controversial deportations to so-called “third countries,” Eswatini—Africa’s last absolute monarchy—has been thrust into a political and humanitarian storm. Opposition leaders, women’s rights organizations, and civil society groups in the small southern African kingdom are sounding the alarm over what they are calling a covert and dangerous arrangement with the United States.
A New Deportation Strategy: Third-Party Transfers to Eswatini
Last week, five foreign nationals—from Vietnam, Jamaica, Laos, Yemen, and Cuba—were deported from the U.S. to Eswatini under a deal few knew existed. The five men, reportedly convicted in the U.S. of crimes including child rape, murder, and burglary, were quietly flown into the landlocked nation of 1.2 million people.
This move follows a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June that permits the Biden administration (under a policy continued by Trump’s administration) to deport non-citizens to “willing third countries” when their home countries refuse to accept them.
According to Eswatini’s government spokesperson Thabile Mdluli, the men will be imprisoned for about 12 months, although this timeframe could shift based on logistics and further negotiations with U.S. officials.
“Eswatini is ready to receive more deportees,” Mdluli said, suggesting a pipeline of future transfers may be in the works.
Domestic Fallout: Protests, Petitions, and Political Fury
Pudemo Condemns the Deal: “An Insult to Emaswati”
The decision has ignited outrage across Eswatini. The People’s United Democratic Movement (Pudemo), the kingdom’s largest opposition party, issued a scathing statement, denouncing the deal as “human trafficking disguised as a deportation agreement.”
“This is not diplomacy but a betrayal,” Pudemo declared. “It’s an insult to all Emaswati who value peace, sovereignty, and national security.”
The party also warned of the broader implications—calling the action a precedent-setting move that could turn Eswatini into “a dumping ground for dangerous criminals unwanted elsewhere.”
Women’s Rights Groups Lead Civil Protest
A coalition of seven leading women’s organizations echoed these concerns. In a formal petition delivered to the U.S. embassy in Mbabane, they demanded:
-
The immediate return of the five deportees to the U.S.
-
Transparent public disclosure of the agreement’s terms
-
Commitment to human rights protections for all individuals involved
The protest outside the U.S. embassy was highly symbolic. Activists carried signs reading:
-
“Eswatini is not a prison for U.S. rejects”
-
“Take the five criminals back!”
-
“Whose taxpayers are paying for this?”
They sang traditional protest songs, danced in defiance, and demanded accountability—not just from their own monarchy but also from Washington.
Official Justifications and Opaque Agreements
Eswatini’s Prime Minister Russell Dlamini dismissed fears of public danger, telling local media that the country’s prisons already house inmates guilty of more serious offenses.
“We are confident in our correctional facilities’ ability to safely manage these individuals,” Dlamini said.
Baphelele Kunene, spokesperson for the prison service, confirmed the deportees are housed in a high-security facility (reportedly Matsapha Correctional Complex) and are being treated like any other prisoner.
“They receive no preferential treatment. They eat the same food, follow the same rules, and are monitored closely,” he said.
U.S. Officials Paint the Men as Monsters
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Tricia McLaughlin publicly defended the deportations. On 16 July, she posted on X (formerly Twitter) that the five men were:
“So uniquely barbaric that their home countries refused to take them back.”
She added, “These depraved monsters have been terrorizing American communities but… they are now off U.S. soil.”
Her blunt language has drawn fire from human rights organizations who argue that such rhetoric dehumanizes individuals and skirts due process.
What We Don’t Know: Secrecy Fuels Speculation
Perhaps most alarming is how little is known about the Eswatini–U.S. deportation arrangement.
-
Are the agreements legally binding?
-
Were any Eswatini lawmakers consulted?
-
What are the human rights guarantees for deportees?
-
What is the cost to U.S. taxpayers?
The U.S. has engaged in similar arrangements with South Sudan, where eight deportees were imprisoned after being held for weeks in a shipping container in Djibouti, and with El Salvador, which received over 200 Venezuelan deportees earlier this year.
Human rights experts warn that these third-party transfers could represent a dangerous evolution of U.S. immigration enforcement, where transparency is replaced by convenience—and countries with fewer safeguards become holding pens for global detainees.
Broader Context: Human Rights Concerns in Eswatini
Eswatini is not a poster child for human rights protections. According to the U.S. State Department’s 2023 Human Rights Report, the country was cited for:
-
Arbitrary or unlawful killings
-
Torture and cruel punishment
-
Lack of judicial independence
-
Political repression
Despite this, the monarchy remains a close, if quiet, diplomatic partner to Western nations. King Mswati III, who has ruled the kingdom since 1986, enjoys vast power and wealth, while political parties are banned from participating in elections.
Pudemo leader Mlungisi Makhanya survived what the party alleges was a poisoning attempt in South Africa last year. The government denies involvement, but the incident only fuels opposition suspicions about Mswati’s regime.
Sovereignty, Secrecy, and Scrutiny
The deportation deal with the U.S. has sparked a national crisis in Eswatini—one that raises troubling questions not only about human rights and sovereignty but also about global norms in handling unwanted migrants and criminals.
For now, five men convicted of heinous crimes are imprisoned far from their homes and former communities, in a country with limited democratic safeguards and a growing chorus of domestic dissent.
The people of Eswatini, meanwhile, are left in the dark—wondering how many more may come, and at what cost to their safety, autonomy, and international reputation.
