Deeply insecure and teetering on the brink of another civil war, South Sudan is frequently described as the most fragile state in the world.
Now the US, a global superpower, has tapped this young state as a destination for expelled foreign migrants, some of whom are violent criminals.
Washington began third-country deportations earlier this year, sending undocumented migrants to countries they are neither citizens of nor have any connections to.
While Central and South America have taken in the vast majority of those deportees, the program was also expanded to Africa, where some say Donald Trump is "dumping" people.
Experts now warn South Sudan, whose inability to deliver basic services as a state has already been compounded by sweeping USAID cuts, may be "importing instability" in a bid to appease its powerful ally.
World's poorest carrying burden
South Sudan, which is among five African nations taking in US deportees, was the poorest country in the world as of November in terms of GDP per capita.
Measured in net household wealth, the United States is the richest in 2025.
In July, South Sudan took in eight deportees from the US, saying it had "responded positively" to Washington's request as a "gesture of goodwill, humanitarian cooperation and commitment to mutual interests".
South Sudan's government, based in Juba, did not divulge details about what it would receive in return.
However, it has been reported that political concessions, including the removal of sanctions on ruling party members, and a chance to improve ties with the US were on offer.
Daniel Akech, a senior analyst for South Sudan at the International Crisis Group, said being in a protracted state of humanitarian and financial distress made the country particularly vulnerable to strong-arming by foreign actors.
"However, Juba's leadership also made a pragmatic, if reluctant, choice to use the deal as a potential pathway to ease crippling sanctions and begin rebuilding diplomatic relationship with the US," he told the ABC.
Since its formation in 2011, South Sudan has continually grappled with internal unrest, economic breakdown, and the spillover effect of the war in Sudan.
With more than 90 per cent of its 12 million population living in extreme poverty, it is heavily dependent on international partners for its developmental and humanitarian needs.
"By accepting this deal, the South Sudan government risks trading a potential diplomatic gain for a definite social loss," Mr Akech said.
"It is effectively importing instability and adding to its immense humanitarian challenges, neglecting the worsening daily reality for its own citizens.
"This situation adds further complexity to South Sudan's already fragile status, illustrating how external powers may exploit the country's internal vulnerabilities to advance their strategic objectives."
Due to the large outflow of people from war-stricken neighbouring Sudan, South Sudan already hosts more refugees than it can handle, in addition to the 2.6 million of its own people who remain internally displaced.
According to the World Bank Group, South Sudan was hosting an estimated 900,000 refugees and asylum seekers from Sudan as of October, with 337,000 more expected to arrive before the end of the year.
Conditions in the refugee camps are squalid, with poor sanitation, outbreaks of diseases and severe malnutrition rife.
An 'equally agenda-motivated' government
Corruption is entrenched in the South Sudanese political sphere and has been a significant driver of the country's humanitarian challenges.
The Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) ranked South Sudan as the most corrupt country in the world in 2025.
A recent United Nations investigation documented how government-affiliated elitists had plundered its resources in an ongoing pursuit of "partisan political ends".
"The country has been captured by a predatory elite that has institutionalised the systematic looting of the nation's wealth for private gain," the report said.
Juba's acceptance of the US's third-country deportations is also likely to have been "agenda-motivated", Edmund Yakani, head of the civil society organisation CEPO, told the ABC.
"They viewed the deal on the deportees as a means to give them the opportunity of winning some gains from the US government."
Unlike other African nations, such as Rwanda and Eswatini, the US did not make South Sudan a cash proposal — money, which if offered, could have been used to bolster the local economy and improve living standards.
Instead, Juba's chief demands included lifting US-imposed sanctions on South Sudan's Vice President Benjamin Bol Mel and his companies, sources have told Reuters.
Mr Bol Mel was planted into the vice-presidency this year after his predecessor, Riek Machar, was placed under house arrest by the government of Salva Kiir, the only president South Sudan has had.
"Interest in accepting the deportees [forms part of South Sudan's efforts] to drive the US administration on non-interference in Riek Machar's trial," Mr Yakani said.
In April, Washington also announced it was revoking US visas for all South Sudanese passport holders.
Reversing those visa revocations, reactivating a bank account at the New York Federal Reserve, and support for Mr Machar's prosecution were Juba's other demands, according to POLITICO, though the US has not agreed to any of them on paper.
Longer-term repercussions
The Trump administration has stated it aims to deport 1 million people annually, but analysis from the Migration Policy Institute suggests it will meet just half that target.
Mr Yakani said efforts to cover that shortfall could likely see Africa become more of a "dropping ground" for US deportees if African governments saw even part of their demands being met.
While South Sudan has so far taken in just eight migrants — one of whom is its own national — an influx of people would increase pressure on state institutions and essential services sectors.
Recent bilateral engagements between the White House and African leaders have hinged on the migration issue, reflecting what observers say is an attempt to transform Africa into a regional network for offloading people.
Increasing migrant numbers could have ramifications for African host countries' security, social stability and international reputation, according to Iman Al-Shaarawy from the UAE-based think tank the Future for Advanced Research and Studies (FARS).
Those include the "division of the African stance", deepening public anger, more resource scarcity, criminality, the perception that national sovereignty is being infringed upon, human rights criticism, and a "re-creation of the narrative of Western dominance" in a form akin to neocolonialism, she said.
Ms Al-Shaarawy also noted the White House's immigration-heavy focus on Africa risked creating an unequal relationship where "certain nations serve as mere instruments to implement US domestic policy, with little regard for their local situations or their people's interests".
Those deported to South Sudan so far have been described by the US as "uniquely barbaric monsters" and the "worst of the worst" criminals, including murderers, rapists and paedophiles.
"Some of them are criminals, they have been involved in crimes. So once they are brought to South Sudan, that means that criminal activities will also increase," Martin Mawut Ochalla, a 28-year-old from Juba, told AP.
Some could 'afford to' turn down overtures
The African nations of Ghana, Uganda, Rwanda and Eswatini have also agreed to take in US deportees, but some others have rejected the Trump administration's overtures.
Burkina Faso, a country long marred by terrorism and insurgency, as well as a close Russian ally, said last month it had refused the "indecent" request, which it called "completely contrary to the principle of dignity".
"Is this a way to put pressure on us? Is this blackmail? Whatever it is … Burkina Faso is a place of dignity, a destination, not a place of expulsion," its foreign minister then told local media.
[MAP]Similarly, Nigeria said in July it would not cave in to pressure to accept undocumented foreign nationals, saying: "We have enough problems of our own … we already have 230 million people."
The US has reportedly also courted Liberia, Senegal, Mauritania, Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Benin, Libya, Angola and Equatorial Guinea.
"Some countries can afford to say no more easily than others," Mr Akech said.
"This boils down to a fundamental difference in leverage, sovereignty and internal stability."
The motivations of the five countries that have agreed to receive deportees vary.
While details of the individual deals the US has struck with them remain shrouded in secrecy and legally ambiguous, here is what we know:
Ghana
Known details about deal: Only citizens of West African countries to be accepted
Reason for acceptance: Out of "pan-African empathy"; on humanitarian grounds; said its decision did not amount to an endorsement of Mr Trump's immigration policy; said Ghana was not receiving anything in return
Deportation intake agreed to: Unspecified
Uganda
Known details about deal: "Temporary arrangement"; only deportees without criminal records or those who aren't unaccompanied minors to be accepted
Reason for acceptance: Reportedly for aid and improvement of bilateral ties
Deportation intake agreed to: Unspecified
Eswatini
Known details about deal: Promised funding of $US5.1 million ($7.7 million)
Reason for acceptance: Reportedly in exchange for the lowering of tariffs
Deportation intake agreed to: 160 third-country nationals
Rwanda
Known details about deal: Promised an "upfront disbursement" of $US7.5 million ($11.4 million); Rwanda would maintain "the ability to approve each individual proposed for resettlement"
Reason for acceptance: In the spirit of "nearly every Rwandan family [that] has experienced the hardships of displacement"
Deportation intake agreed to: 250 third-country nationals
The human cost
The welfare of those being deported has also been raised as a key concern by international organisations and rights groups.
In September, a coalition of more than 50 organisations penned a letter to the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights calling for urgent action to protect migrants' rights:
"Forcible expulsions from the United States and transfer of migrants to countries in which they are not citizens or nationals, nor habitual residents, particularly without adequate due process or consideration of international protection claims, and including in circumstances in which they are transferred to situations of prolonged detention on unclear legal bases and in poor conditions, all constitute serious violations of international and African law and standards."
The UN has said deportations of foreign nationals to third countries — many with troubling rights records, such as Eswatini — put them at risk of violations, including torture, arbitrary deprivation of life, and enforced disappearances, in the absence of legal avenues for those in need to seek.
While some African host nations have successfully negotiated the repatriation of migrants, Mr Akech said the main focus for weaker states such as South Sudan was fulfilling their diplomatic bargains with the US.
"What happens to [the migrants] afterward is largely a secondary concern that the state is unequipped to manage effectively."
