The move extends the original Proclamation 10949, which targeted 12 high-risk countries, to include Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, South Sudan, and Syria.
These nations join the likes of Afghanistan, Iran, Libya, and Somalia under full entry restrictions, which suspend visa issuance due to security concerns linked to terrorism and governance challenges.
ADVERTISEMENT
Other nations, including Laos, Sierra Leone, and a dozen African states such as Angola, Benin, Cote d’Ivoire, Gabon, Malawi, Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe, are now under partial restrictions.
Netizens react
The announcement has drawn a mix of criticism, humour, and pragmatic reflections from Africans on social media.
Residents from South Africa, Kenya, and beyond voiced their opinions on Facebook and Twitter, highlighting the irony of the decision and the perceived double standards.
ADVERTISEMENT
Mfana Ka Gogo from Soweto noted, “That time, Americans had free entry in Africa in and out. They treated them as tourists.”
Chene Constantine referenced President Trump’s heritage, writing, “An immigrant sending away other immigrants.”
Some called for reciprocal measures; Tutso Mosolom suggested, “They must ban themselves from coming to Africa… And when they want to travel to Africa, Africa must raise the visa price for anyone from America.”
Meanwhile, Tania Viljoen from Rustenburg offered a more measured view: “Nothing wrong with that. Just doing his job… Now let us focus on our own country’s issues.”
ADVERTISEMENT
Analysts note that these reactions reflect broader African frustration with travel restrictions perceived as one-sided, often affecting countries with limited global influence while leaving citizens of powerful nations largely unrestricted.
As Africans continue to respond online, the debate raises questions about equity in international travel policies and the broader implications of security-driven restrictions on global mobility.
