By: Nana Karikari, Senior Global Affairs Correspondent
The United States has nearly doubled its list of restricted nations to 39 countries, signaling a radical shift in immigration and travel ban policy. This expansion, effective January 1, 2026, adds four more African nations—Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, and South Sudan—to the full travel ban list. Additionally, Sierra Leone, Laos, and Syria were elevated from partial to total bans, while the policy now targets holders of Palestinian Authority travel documents. Collectively, these restrictions affect roughly 13% of the world’s population.
While Washington cites security vulnerabilities following a November shooting incident in D.C., the timing has sparked accusations of “pay-to-play” diplomacy. At the same time the administration is barring entry for many, it has launched the Trump Gold Card. This program allows wealthy noncitizens to buy expedited residency for a $1 million gift plus a $15,000 non-refundable processing fee.
Muted Diplomacy and Strategic Silence
Despite the severity of the measures, official responses across Africa have remained strikingly reserved. The African Union (AU) avoided direct condemnation, instead urging a “balanced and evidence-based” approach. Analysts suggest this silence is strategic as nations evaluate potential shifts toward global rivals like Russia and China.
In Mali, foreign ministry official Samuel Saye remarked that it was “too early for us to comment,” reflecting a broader trend of cautious observation. The AU remains focused on protecting the “long-standing ties” between the U.S. and Africa, even as those ties are tested by the new restrictions.
The African Perspective: Unease and Resilience
The expanded restrictions now target a significant portion of West and Central Africa. Beyond the total bans, 12 of the 15 countries facing new partial restrictions are African.
These include nations like Nigeria, Senegal, and Tanzania, where citizens face severe hurdles for education, business, and tourism.
Highlighting the perceived bias, Abuja lawyer Ramlah Ibrahim Nok stated: “I believe this position is unfair because it paints all Nigerians with the same brush.” Malian resident Mohamed Keita added: “It’s very unfortunate; this decision may penalize Malians who do business with the United States.”
Ghana: The Diplomatic Exception
Ghana stands as a notable exception, having successfully navigated high-level negotiations to remain off the travel ban list. Earlier in 2025, the U.S. had imposed temporary visa limitations on Ghanaian citizens, but these were reversed in September. This allows Ghanaians to continue receiving five-year multiple-entry visas—a rarity in the current climate.
Foreign Minister Samuel Okudz\eto Ablakwa called the outcome an “affirmation of the strong partnership” between the two nations. However, local shopkeeper Barikisu Yakubu expressed skepticism: “We see the planes landing with deportees every week. It feels like we traded our brothers for a stamp in a passport.”
Regional Security and Religious Pressure
Nigeria’s inclusion on the partial list is tied to high visa overstay rates and internal security concerns. The Trump administration has also intensified focus on religious freedom, recently designating Nigeria as a “country of particular concern.”
Secretary of State Marco Rubio justified targeted visa bans on specific officials, stating the U.S. is taking “decisive action” against those supporting violations of religious freedom. This highlights a shift toward using immigration tools to pressure governments over the killing of Christians in the Middle Belt.
Global Reach: Beyond the African Continent
While Africa bears the brunt of the 2026 expansion, the policy deeply impacts the Middle East. The administration added Syria to the full travel ban list, joining existing bans on Iran, Yemen, Libya, and Afghanistan.
Critics argue the geographic clustering mirrors the controversial 2017 “Muslim Ban.” Supporters, however, insist the focus is purely on vetting deficiencies in conflict zones. By including Middle Eastern territories, the policy reinforces a pattern of exclusion that targets specific religious and regional demographics.
Dehumanizing Rhetoric and Radical Shifts
The administration has drawn fire for its starkly different treatment of African demographics. President Trump referred to Somali migrants as “garbage” and claimed they have “ripped off” the U.S. for billions. He stated: “We don’t want them in our country. Let them go back to their country and fix it.”
U.S. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, a Somali-born former refugee, has emerged as a powerful voice of dissent. Her perspective is elevated by her lived experience of fleeing civil war and Kenyan refugee camps. She wrote: “The president knows he is failing, and so he is reverting to what he knows best: trying to divert attention by stoking bigotry. He denigrates not only Somalis but so many other immigrants, too, particularly those who are Black and Muslim.”
In contrast, the administration has created a unique refugee pathway for white South African Afrikaners, claiming they are victims of “genocide.” South African President Cyril Ramaphosa called these claims “regrettable” and based on “false allegations,” as the U.S. simultaneously boycotted the G20 summit in South Africa.
Business, Students, and the World Cup
The ban’s ripple effects extend to the global economy and sports. The 2026 soccer World Cup presents a unique crisis. While athletes are exempt, fans from qualified nations like Senegal and Ivory Coast face “partial restrictions” based on visitor visa overstay rates of 4.3% and 8.5% respectively.
Taxi driver Pape Seye in Dakar summarized the frustration: “The players go, the money goes, but the people who love the game are left behind. It’s not a world cup if the world isn’t invited.”
Paused Lives and Premium Access
A major policy shift has emerged regarding those already within the U.S. The Department of Homeland Security has suspended the processing of green card applications for refugees and asylees. Furthermore, the total refugee ceiling for FY 2026 was slashed to just 7,500—the lowest in U.S. history.
Simultaneously, the Trump Gold Card offers a fast-track to residency for a $1 million gift, while the proposed $5 million “Trump Platinum Card” promises tax benefits for wealthy foreigners. Shev Dalal-Dheini of the American Immigration Lawyers Association observed: “If you’re wealthy, if you can pay to play, then you’re welcome… but if you’re coming to seek humanitarian protection, then we’re going to make it much tougher.”
A Continent at a Crossroads
The 2026 travel expansion represents a fundamental shift in U.S.-Africa relations, moving away from developmental aid toward a transaction-based security model. Supporters argue these measures ensure American safety. Critics see a betrayal of humanitarian values that will only drive African partners toward Washington’s rivals. Whether this “Gold Card” diplomacy can coexist with “Shut Door” security remains the defining question for the region’s future.
