The United States has deported five foreign nationals deemed so dangerous that their home countries refused to take them back. The individuals, originating from Vietnam, Jamaica, Cuba, Yemen, and Laos, were relocated to Eswatini, a small, autocratic kingdom in southern Africa, following a discreet diplomatic arrangement.
The transfer, announced via the X platform by Tricia McLaughlin, Assistant Secretary at the Department of Homeland Security, reportedly involved individuals with convictions for crimes including murder, child rape, and gang-related violence. Described by McLaughlin as “so barbaric” they posed an ongoing threat to U.S. communities, the deportees were quietly removed from the country with no public disclosure of the date, time, or method of transport.
While Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) conducts thousands of deportations each year, the operation stood apart for its selective nature and financial scale. According to ICE Air Operations, chartered deportation flights using aircraft such as Boeing 737s or MD-80s typically cost around $8,600 per flight hour. But for “high-risk” transfers involving increased security or specialized aircraft, the hourly rate can range from $6,900 to $26,800.
Intercontinental trips lasting several hours quickly accumulate costs. A single long-haul mission like this one can exceed $50,000. If military aircraft were deployed, the price tag escalates even further: a C-17 mission is estimated at $252,000 per route, while a C-130 can cost between $816,000 and $852,000, according to figures cited by The Economic Times.
Such operations are rare and executed only on a case-by-case basis, often without clear public oversight. It remains unclear whether the five individuals were previously held in U.S. prisons or in ICE custody, and what arrangements, if any, have been made with authorities in Eswatini regarding their detention or legal status.
The lack of transparency has drawn sharp criticism. Ingiphile Dlamini, spokesperson for the pro-democracy movement SWALIMO, condemned the “total absence of official communication” and warned that Eswatini, one of the world’s poorest and most politically repressive nations, is ill-equipped to manage individuals with “complex backgrounds and serious convictions.”
“This is not just a matter of logistics,” Dlamini said. “It’s about public safety, sovereignty, and the risk of importing dangerous elements into a fragile and unstable context.”
Eswatini has a recent history of violent political unrest. Pro-democracy protests in 2021 resulted in dozens of deaths and mass detentions. Activists fear the arrival of foreign convicts, without consultation or public notice, could further destabilize the country.
International observers are also raising ethical and diplomatic concerns. The use of third countries to offload unwanted detainees has long existed in the shadows of migration policy. In some cases, analysts believe such deals are made in exchange for favorable terms on trade, aid, or visa agreements. But without public scrutiny, the legitimacy of such transfers remains questionable.
Italy has faced similar challenges in managing deportations of foreign nationals with criminal records, relying on bilateral agreements with Albania to facilitate returns. Those transfers, too, are costly: often conducted by chartered planes or ferries, operations can cost between $16,000 and $32,000 depending on scale and method.
Critics argue that the broader practice of relocating high-risk individuals to third countries, particularly those with weak governance or poor human rights records, raises serious moral questions.
“Just because a deportation is legally executed doesn’t mean it’s ethically sound,” one international law expert told AP. “We’re seeing governments outsource risk without accountability.”
