According to US authorities, the restrictions aim to enhance national security by addressing weaknesses in vetting, information-sharing, and screening systems.

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.

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.

These limitations are largely due to issues such as visa overstays, insufficient passport controls, and gaps in civil documentation systems. Palestinian Authority-issued travel documents are also affected following concerns over compromised vetting processes amid ongoing regional conflicts.

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.

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.”

Others emphasised the broader geopolitical and economic consequences. Nairobi resident Abdikarim Salat commented, “If all people of other countries decide not to go to the USA, then the USA will collapse within two years.”

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.”

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.

The latest proclamation underscores longstanding tensions between national security concerns and diplomatic relations, particularly as African governments balance compliance with US requirements and safeguarding their citizens’ mobility.

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.