By Mahmud Tim Kargbo
When the United States imposed visa sanctions on Sierra Leonean officials following the country’s disputed 2023 elections, it did so under the banner of promoting democracy and justice. These sanctions were reported widely in the international press (https://allafrica.com/view/group/main/main/id/00086849.html, https://westafricareport.com/sierra-leone-u-s-imposes-visa-restrictions-on-sierra-leone-officials-for-undermining-the-democratic-process/, https://www.africa-confidential.com/article/id/14584/Post-elections_sanctions_mark_setback_to_US_ties).
However, as the consequences unfold, it became increasingly evident that these punitive measures are more than mere reactions to governance concerns. They reflect a broader ideological posture that categorises nations as either redeemed or condemned, based on their alignment with a particular moral narrative.
The fallout from these sanctions is already palpable. Many Sierra Leonean students seeking to study in the United States have experienced visa denials or unexplained delays. According to the Sierra Leone Monitor, this has disrupted academic opportunities for dozens of students and young professionals (https://www.sierraleonemonitor.org/us-visa-ban-sanctions-sierra-leone).
Aspirations for education and international exchange are now caught in the crossfire of geopolitical manoeuvring. Development partnerships have been placed on hold, and Sierra Leone’s national security posture is increasingly undermined by rising isolation, reduced diplomatic cooperation and financial disinvestment.
In June 2025, the Trump administration issued a new executive immigration order, which explicitly named Sierra Leone as one of the countries restricted from certain visa categories, citing failures in information-sharing standards (https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/06/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-restricts-the-entry-of-foreign-nationals-to-protect-the-united-states-from-foreign-terrorists-and-other-national-security-and-public-safety-threats/).
This marked a shift from targeted sanctions on officials to blanket immigration controls on nationals, with significant implications for mobility, development and bilateral relations.
PAST AND PRESENT: A PATTERN OF SANCTIONS AGAINST SIERRA LEONE
This is not the first instance in which Sierra Leone has been subjected to US visa restrictions. In September 2017, the Trump administration imposed sanctions under Section 243(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, citing Sierra Leone’s alleged refusal to repatriate deported nationals. In response, the US Department of Homeland Security suspended the issuance of B visas to certain foreign ministry and immigration officials (https://www.state.gov/prior-visa-sanctions-under-section-243d-of-the-immigration-and-nationality-act/).
Although more limited in scope, the 2017 sanctions set a precedent for using immigration policy as a coercive foreign policy tool. (https://westafricareport.com/sierra-leone-u-s-imposes-visa-restrictions-on-sierra-leone-officials-for-undermining-the-democratic-process/) and the 2025 executive order (https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/06/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-restricts-the-entry-of-foreign-nationals-to-protect-the-united-states-from-foreign-terrorists-and-other-national-security-and-public-safety-threats/)
The 2023 visa bans reflect a deeper, more ideologically charged trend — punishing whole categories of people without judicial or multilateral oversight.
BEYOND THE LANGUAGE OF DEMOCRACY: AN IDEOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK
To understand the rationale behind such actions, the work of political philosopher Eric Voegelin is instructive. Voegelin criticised attempts to impose utopian “perfect justice” through politics, calling it an effort to “immanentise the eschaton”. This concept is well explained by John G. Grove in his essay “What’s Behind the ‘Woke Right’?” where he links this impulse to a gnostic worldview that sees current political reality as inherently evil and therefore in need of moral cleansing. (https://americanmind.org/essays/whats-behind-the-woke-right/).
The United States’ actions towards Sierra Leone mirror this ideological approach. Rather than supporting the country’s constitutional mechanisms for electoral resolution, the US has positioned itself as a moral authority, bypassing domestic institutions in favour of executive sanctions. The 2023 and 2025 measures reflect not international collaboration, but unilateral moral judgement.
THE MORALISM OF POWER AND THE COLLAPSE OF NUANCE
Sierra Leonean students with legitimate academic placements in the US have become collateral victims of this policy shift. Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees the right to freedom of movement, while Article 26 ensures the right to education. (https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights) (https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights).
Furthermore, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights signed by both the US and Sierra Leone, commits states to making higher education accessible to all based on capacity.
(https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-economic-social-and-cultural-rights).
These rights have been effectively denied to students and young professionals, not for their own actions, but because of political decisions made by their government. This constitutes a form of collective punishment, violating Article 2 of the UDHR, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of political or national status.
The 2017 sanctions were narrowly focused and largely symbolic. The 2023 and 2025 measures are more expansive, impacting not only politicians, but also ordinary citizens. The economic consequences are already becoming apparent. International investors, concerned about reputational risks, are beginning to withdraw from Sierra Leone. Development financing is being redirected to countries perceived as less politically volatile. In this vacuum, Sierra Leone risks being drawn closer to powers such as China and Russia, which offer investment unencumbered by ideological conditions, albeit often at the cost of transparency, accountability, and equitable benefit for the wider population. This mirrors the pattern of opaque arrangements and highly exploitative practices, including many involving the United States, that have characterised Sierra Leone’s post-independence economic history and continue to cause suffering for the majority.
However, with the current geopolitical shifts, Sierra Leone might benefit this time around, provided the mindset of the most senior figure within State House shifts towards respecting systems and processes for the general good, especially in light of Russia’s newly determined approach towards the continent.
CONSTITUTIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY VERSUS IDEOLOGICAL ABSOLUTISM
Sierra Leone’s 1991 Constitution provides for electoral dispute resolution through the judiciary. Section 5(2)(a) and Section 10 affirm democratic governance and political plurality. Section 78 explicitly mandates that electoral grievances be settled in court (https://constitutionnet.org/sites/default/files/2017-11/Constitution%20of%20Sierra%20Leone%20%281991%29.pdf).
By ignoring these legal mechanisms and acting on unilateral executive determinations, the United States undermines the very democratic institutions it claims to defend. These actions run counter to international legal norms. The United Nations Human Rights Council has condemned such unilateral coercive measures, declaring in Resolution 34/13 that sanctions lacking Security Council approval violate international law and obstruct national development (https://www.ohchr.org/en/statements/2022/09/unilateral-coercive-measures-are-major-obstacle-development-and-violate-international).
The 1986 International Court of Justice ruling in the Nicaragua v. United States case confirmed that coercive economic actions taken without legal mandate constitute unlawful intervention in another state’s affairs (https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/70).
EXTENDING THE PATTERN: ETHIOPIA AND BEYOND
The case of Sierra Leone is not isolated. In 2021, during the Tigray conflict, the US imposed visa restrictions on Ethiopian and Eritrean officials without UN or AU endorsement (https://www.state.gov/visa-restrictions-imposed-on-ethiopian-and-eritrean-government-officials/).
In 2019, Washington revoked the visa of an International Criminal Court prosecutor investigating US actions in Afghanistan (https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/03/15/us-revokes-icc-prosecutors-visa). These examples reflect a consistent strategy of bypassing multilateral institutions in favour of unilateral executive decisions.
TOWARDS A POST-IDEOLOGICAL FOREIGN POLICY
Sierra Leone must now stand firm in its constitutional commitments and demand more than fairness. It must demand respect for sovereignty, proportionality in diplomacy and epistemic humility from international partners.
The New Science of Politics warns against ideological foreign policy that collapses the world into binary moral categories. Grove echoes this: “Nothing can ultimately separate us from our ability to live in truth, and to critique and unmask the errors of the present age.”
Sierra Leone’s insistence on constitutionalism is not an act of defiance. It is a reaffirmation of democratic legitimacy in a global order increasingly shaped by unilateral ideology.
REFERENCES
https://allafrica.com/view/group/main/main/id/00086849.html
https://www.africa-confidential.com/article/id/14584/Post-elections_sanctions_mark_setback_to_US_ties
https://www.sierraleonemonitor.org/us-visa-ban-sanctions-sierra-leone
https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/06/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-restricts-the-entry-of-foreign-nationals-to-protect-the-united-states-from-foreign-terrorists-and-other-national-security-and-public-safety-threats/
https://www.state.gov/prior-visa-sanctions-under-section-243d-of-the-immigration-and-nationality-act/
https://americanmind.org/essays/whats-behind-the-woke-right/
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/international-covenant-economic-social-and-cultural-rights
https://constitutionnet.org/sites/default/files/2017-11/Constitution%20of%20Sierra%20Leone%20%281991%29.pdf
https://www.ohchr.org/en/statements/2022/09/unilateral-coercive-measures-are-major-obstacle-development-and-violate-international
https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/70
https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/03/15/us-revokes-icc-prosecutors-visa
https://www.state.gov/visa-restrictions-imposed-on-ethiopian-and-eritrean-government-officials/