Trump Is Returning Pro-democracy Dissidents to Authoritarian Countries Like Russia and Iran for Arrest

A few weeks ago, prominent Russian opposition leaders in exile made a stunning appeal to the Canadian government: Please accept the hundreds of asylum seekers currently detained in the United States before they are summarily returned to Russia. It is clear that Russian asylum seekers are being deported en masse to their home countries, with many of them imprisoned upon arrival due to their participation in opposition and anti-war campaigns. Last week, reporters learned that hundreds of Iranian citizens already detained in immigration detention centers would be deported to Iran. Some were allegedly willing to return, but others were not, and some lawyers said their clients had disappeared.

Over the past few years, experts, civil society and governments have adopted a name for when states cross borders to silence dissent. This is called transnational repression, and the United States government used to strongly oppose it. Now, as these stories show, Washington was an enthusiastic collaborator.

A few weeks ago, prominent Russian opposition leaders in exile made a stunning appeal to the Canadian government: Please accept the hundreds of asylum seekers currently detained in the United States before they are summarily returned to Russia. It is clear that Russian asylum seekers are being deported en masse to their home countries, with many of them imprisoned upon arrival due to their participation in opposition and anti-war campaigns. Last week, reporters learned that hundreds of Iranian citizens already detained in immigration detention centers would be deported to Iran. Some were allegedly willing to return, but others were not, and some lawyers said their clients had disappeared.

Over the past few years, experts, civil society and governments have adopted a name for when states cross borders to silence dissent. This is called transnational repression, and the United States government used to strongly oppose it. Now, as these stories show, Washington was an enthusiastic collaborator.

To the extent that people have become familiar with the term, transnational repression may give rise to incidents such as the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul, the kidnapping of Rwandan activist Paul Rusesabagina from Dubai, and the murder plots against Iranian journalist Masih Alinejad in New York. These are certainly glaring examples of governments targeting dissidents on foreign soil. But research has consistently demonstrated that most transnational acts of repression involve some degree of cooperation between the home state and the host state to secure the return of opponents and punish them.

This usually involves subverting the home state or manipulating the host state’s personnel or institutions. For example, the home country may trick Interpol into issuing a notice to detain someone for political reasons, and the host country may rely on this notice to detain and deport someone back to the home country. Alternatively, the home state may force the host state’s security officers to detain and extradite someone so that they can be illegally returned. For example, this has been the modus operandi of Türkiye’s global kidnapping campaign since 2016. This cooperation is often intertwined with a weak rule of law in the host state and with systemic hostility towards migrants. When it comes to facilitating transnational repression, “hard-line” immigration systems provide more opportunities for abuse and failure.

Through these deportations, the United States proactively embraced the return of dissidents as a political issue. While there have been previous examples of transnational repression on US soil, they have typically involved failed regimes due to active manipulation by the home state or unilateral actions such as assassination plots on US soil. The recent Russian deportations are different because they appear to involve proactive cooperation. The fact that many deported Russians were arrested upon arrival suggests that the United States informed Moscow of who would be returned and when.

The United States’ participation in these transnational acts of repression constitutes a grave violation of its human rights responsibilities. International law strictly prohibits refoulement, or returning someone to a place where they are likely to face torture or ill-treatment. Refoulement is expressly prohibited under US law through the country’s accession to the United Nations Convention against Torture. The fact is that unlike many international treaties, this treaty was signed and ratified by the US Senate in 1990, so there is no doubt that it is a law. Iran has never signed the Convention against Torture, and although Russia remains a signatory, it has just withdrawn from the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and is no longer bound by the European Convention on Human Rights. Although Russia and Iran may have provided diplomatic assurances that deportees would not be abused, these assurances should be viewed as cosmetic given the widespread violations committed by the two countries against detained individuals. The failure of the American judicial system to stop these executive actions that clearly violate human rights obligations is a mark of disgrace to the rule of law in the United States.

It’s also a major reversal of years of policy making on a topic that had bipartisan support. Under the Biden administration, but with clear interest and support from Republicans in Congress, there has been a “whole-of-government” policy to address transnational repression as a matter of foreign and domestic policy. The administration has raised the issue with allies and in multilateral forums, and the Justice Department and the intelligence community have built complex workstreams to address it. The United States has been widely recognized as a leader on this topic, and its interventions have helped push other democracies to take up the topic themselves, which was evident recently in the 2025 G7 Summit Leaders’ Statement, but also in a slew of new domestic policy initiatives in countries around the world. According to current US officials, combating transnational repression remains a priority for the State Department, but that is hard to believe given the actions of the Trump administration.

At a time when the US government is killing unarmed civilians in international waters, participation in transnational repression may seem like a secondary issue. But as well as being a disaster for those who have already been illegally deported or who fear what will happen next, it represents a more fundamental assault on the international order founded on the protection of individual dignity. Choosing to engage in transnational repression signals that the government will violate international norms at the expense of rights, and will work with openly authoritarian governments to set new illiberal norms that privilege the state.

The future they are building is one in which nations cooperate in global sovereignty to suppress transnational dissent, exchanging favors and exchanging dissidents across borders. It is a situation in which the primary means of continuing the struggle against dictatorships – fleeing to a more democratic country and preaching from there – is blocked. US engagement in this behavior – which is already widespread in Central Asia, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and increasingly in East Africa – would be a massive blow to the prospect of exile. This could not come at a worse time, as the spread of digital technologies and authoritarian impunity have already facilitated transnational repression on a scale and scope never seen before.

In light of the disaster caused by the current administration’s actions, there is an opportunity for other countries committed to combating transnational repression to make a difference. Because of its sometimes cavalier approach to diplomacy, the Biden administration helped create the impression at the United Nations and elsewhere that transnational accusations of repression were being used as a political weapon by Western countries to punish criminals in the Global South. Advocacy efforts by human rights organizations and United Nations bodies have helped change this perception, but the problem persists.

A blanket condemnation of US President Donald Trump’s actions by allied governments in Europe and elsewhere would demonstrate their resolve to fight transnational repression regardless of the identity of the perpetrators. As strange as it may have seemed two years ago, states must also quickly adopt policies to accept dissidents forced to flee the United States. Defining what the United States is doing, pledging to fight its institutionalization, and ensuring that other countries remain a safe haven against global tyranny will help democracy advocates continue their global struggle.