dw.com
Ghana Accepts 14 West African Migrants Deported from US
At the request of the US, Ghana accepted 14 West African migrants—13 Nigerians and one Gambian—who were deported from the United States on September 10th, 2025, and subsequently transferred to their home countries.
- What are the long-term implications of this approach to migration management?
- This approach may solidify a power imbalance, where African nations face pressure to accept deportations. This raises concerns about human rights and the fairness of the US's migration policy. It also underscores Africa's limited influence in global migration management.
- What is the immediate impact of the US deporting West African migrants to Ghana?
- The immediate impact is the transfer of 14 West African migrants (13 Nigerians and 1 Gambian) from the US to Ghana, then onward to their respective countries of origin. This action highlights the power imbalance between the US and African nations in migration policies.
- How does this event relate to broader US migration policies and relations with African countries?
- This deportation reflects the US's increasingly hardline stance on African migrants, intensifying since the Trump administration. The US seeks cooperation on economic and counter-terrorism fronts to secure African nations' collaboration in deportations, as evidenced by recent White House invitations to five African heads of state to discuss such agreements.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article presents a balanced view by including perspectives from the Ghanaian president, civil society actors, and experts. However, the framing slightly emphasizes the criticisms of the US policy by giving more space to the concerns of the NGO coordinator and expert, potentially influencing the reader to lean towards a negative perception of the US actions. The headline, if there was one, could also significantly influence this.
Language Bias
The language used is mostly neutral, but terms like "drastique" (drastic) and "politique de fermeté" (firm policy) used by the NGO coordinator carry a negative connotation toward US policy. The phrase "rapport de force" (power dynamic) implies an imbalance of power, subtly influencing the reader's perception. More neutral terms could be used, such as 'strict' instead of 'drastic', and 'decisive policy' instead of 'firm policy'.
Bias by Omission
The article omits potential perspectives that could offer a counterpoint to the criticisms. For instance, the US government's justification for deporting these migrants is not explicitly detailed. Omitting the reasons behind the deportations could lead to a biased understanding. The article also doesn't mention the legal status of the migrants being deported, which is a key piece of missing context.
False Dichotomy
The article doesn't explicitly present a false dichotomy, but the focus on criticism of US policy might unintentionally create a simplified narrative. The nuance of the complex issue of migration and international cooperation is reduced by emphasizing only the negative aspects of the US approach.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the forced return of migrants, raising concerns about human rights violations and the unequal power dynamics between the US and African nations. This undermines the principles of justice and fair treatment enshrined in SDG 16. The US pressure on African nations to accept deported migrants points to a lack of equitable partnerships and respect for national sovereignty.