US proposes selective visa for UK tourists

[davidm]

In the US papers today- US wants to impose visas for British citizens of Pakistani origin as they are a security threat.
"Among the options that have been put on the table, according to British officials, was the most onerous option to Britain, that of canceling the entire visa waiver program that allows all Britons entry to the United States without a visa. Another option, politically fraught as it is, would be to single out Britons of Pakistani origin, requiring them to make visa applications for the United States."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/02/world ... ref=slogin

[stedman]

The most sensible solution would be to do what is already done in Ireland and some other countries - have US POE officers based at all airports with both direct and connecting flights to the US. The technology is available and there is precedent. And where this is not feasible, a visa must be requested prior to travel. Don't know if they'll have the manpower but they can always downsize embassies or other related departments.

[smalldog]

The guy in the New York Times is of Pakistani origin but born in Britain. Supposing he were to travel to the US, how could immigration officials possibly know that he is of Pakistani origin rather than an Indian Muslim or something else? The scheme seems unworkable unless it is limited to those whose place of birth is given as Pakistan in their passport -- but this would exclude most of the examples that are held up to to support the scheme.

[maveli62]

But as the article rightly pointed ot it will not stop people like Mr. Khyam. US POE officers will not be able to catch him. Do not forget the 9/11 culprits were allowed in by these officers.

The day is not too far where irrespective of the color of your passport you require a visa depending on the clor of your skin. the only people to be blamed for this is people like Mr. Khyam.

[stedman]

The general perception is that it is easier to turn people away the less the investment in the trip. So, refusing a visa before a ticket has been purchased is easier than turning someone back after a 7-10 hour flight and putting them on the next plane (which could be full = an even longer, usually overnight delay when all sorts of things could happen) Having the POE in London as is done in Dublin means the interview is held even before anyone boards a plane and people can be turned away there and then, with time to cancel their flight if the tickets are flexible. This will be a great thing IMO as the delays at LAX and JFK (and I imagine, other large US airports) are getting longer and longer and can be very frustrating if you have people meeting you.

[Christophe]

The day is not too far where irrespective of the color of your passport you require a visa depending on the clor of your skin. the only people to be blamed for this is people like Mr. Khyam.

Actually, Kenya used to do this - British citizens did not require visas unless they were of Indian/Pakistani/Bangladeshi origin. (The rationale was nothing to do with terrorism or security issues though.) The policy was rather roundly condemned by many organisations, including, if my memory serves me correctly, the British government of the day. The issue is no longer alive in that all British citizens now require a visa to visit Kenya.

Obviously there are many problems with such a policy. One is that it blatantly adversely discriminates against people on the basis of their race or ethnic origin (as opposed to their nationality). The other problems are practical ones - for example: How can one know for certain what country someone's forebears come from? What of British citizens who were born in Pakistan but not of a Pakistani background? What of British citizens of a Pakistani background but not born in Pakistan (or in Britain)? And so on and so on.

It will be interesting to see what happens. Ultimately, of course, the UK has no say in the immigration policies of the United States. Even so, I shouldn't necessarily believe what I read in the papers, even in a reputable paper like the New York Times.

[Dawie]

I think the fact that countries discriminate on nationality alone is dispicable, never mind on race.

[Marco 72]

I imagine that by "of Pakistani origin" they would mean someone who was born in Pakistan, otherwise there would be no way for a POE officer to determine whether the person is eligible for the VWP or not. Having visa free travel restricted to a certain class of citizens is nothing new. Israel for example only allows visa free travel for German citizens if they were born after 31.12.1927.

The general perception is that it is easier to turn people away the less the investment in the trip. So, refusing a visa before a ticket has been purchased is easier than turning someone back after a 7-10 hour flight and putting them on the next plane (which could be full = an even longer, usually overnight delay when all sorts of things could happen) Having the POE in London as is done in Dublin means the interview is held even before anyone boards a plane and people can be turned away there and then, with time to cancel their flight if the tickets are flexible.

All true, but why would the US government care about the welfare of foreign tourists? It doesn't make any difference to them if travellers are turned away at JFK or Heathrow. Judging from the past few years it doesn't seem to make much difference to them if people are turned off from visiting the US.

[Christophe]

The story is not true, according to this morning's Today programme on BBC Radio Four. The US consul was quite adamant that no discussions along the lines suggested in the New York Times report had taken place. The item on the BBC website (as of this morning - it might have been updated now) is more guarded, but it is careful to make it clear that the possible changes and discussions are "as reported" in the NY Times. The very bottom of the article reports a muted repudiation of the news by "US officials".

The US consul interviewed on this morning's radio programme, however, emphatically did not rule out changes to the visa waiver scheme, despite denying the reported change (or a change of that sort).

Again - whom to believe? Who knows?!

[Dawie]

If the USA were to prevent all British citizens from using the visa waiver programme I certainly hope that the British government would have the guts to impose a visa requirement on American tourists in return.

The implications of this would be quite dramatic considering the large volume of tourists that flow between the two countries.

[Christophe]

If the USA were to prevent all British citizens from using the visa waiver programme I certainly hope that the British government would have the guts to impose a visa requirement on American tourists in return.

The implications of this would be quite dramatic considering the large volume of tourists that flow between the two countries.

Actually, I don't support that sort of thinking on the part of governments - it seems to me to be petty. The UK (and lots of other countries with traditionally fairly relaxed policies about who may travel visa-free - e.g. Switzerland, the Nordic countries (though now they are beholden to the Schengen area requirements), New Zealand, Canada, South Africa I think) have not adopted this approach.

[Dawie]

Petty yes, but no more petty than America's actions would be should they take the UK off the visa waiver list.

[Christophe]

Petty yes, but no more petty than America's actions would be should they take the UK off the visa waiver list.

There is merit, though, in taking a bigger view of things, and I would hope that the British government and its policy advisers would be wise enough to do that. (Is wisdom likely to be found in those circles? Well...)

[Fairtrade]

With the risk of terrorism I think everyone should apply for visas regardless of race or nationality.On this basis nobody would be discriminated against and no terrorist would be able to enter a country visa free regardless of citizenship.

Why do I say that?? Well if you are going to discriminate based on race or relligion it would mean alot of inocent people will get caught up in the system because they have been tarred with the same brush.. We all know not all Pakistani nationals are terrorist and by saying British nationals with Pakistani decent should apply for visas will stir up facial tensions between communities in the Uk.

Another good reason why I say everyone should apply for visas is the fact that it would be fair on everyone in the world.

Some countries like up and coming developing countries almost always have to apply and pay for their visas regardless of that person's status, income, or treat they pose. For example a succusful businessman from a developing country always will have to apply for a visas regardless if he is millionaire and making more money than some people in the developed world and that the chance of him overstaying his visa is very low because he is succesful businessman and making more money in his own country but because he resides in a developing country like for example, russia, south africa, china, india or brazil he needs to apply for a visa because of his nationality not the fact that his chance of overstaying is very slim. A good example would be a rich indian IT specialits that makes loads of money in his own country, the chance of him overstaying his tourist visa is very slim but that person would always have to apply for a visa because he/she is Indian not the fact that she is living a first world lifestyle.
Another good example be a succesful russian oil producers, they all lived a more first world lifestyle than the mojority of the first world but that person would needs a visa because he/she is russian regardless of him being a succesful businessman, no terrorist treat and having a good income in his own country.

I know it wouldn't be nice to apply for visas but this evil world is unsafe and granting people visa free travel just based on the that they have a brtish or american passport is unfair and doesn't make them less of a terrorist treat.

Also Any terrorist can buy a passport on the black market and then enter the us based on the only fact that he/she has a british passport. The days of visa free travel should unfortunately be coming to an end because it doesn't make sense, and it's only privellage to some and not others.


No wonder the demand for a British and American passport is so sought after, make everyone carry visas regardless of citizenship and you will see the application for british/american passports going down!

[Christophe]

With the risk of terrorism I think everyone should apply for visas regardless of race or nationality.

Australia had a universal visa policy for many years. (New Zealanders alone were exempted because of the "Trans-Tasman" agreement.) One of the reasons always given for this was that it was "fair". In fact, Australia still has a universal visa policy, although certain nationalities can now apply for an electronic visa, obviating the need to send (or take) one's passport to an Australian visa-issuing office. Is all this a good idea? Who knows. The rejection rates for tourist visas from many countries is extremely low, which makes one wonder if it is worth the effort.

[Dawie]

With the risk of terrorism I think everyone should apply for visas regardless of race or nationality.On this basis nobody would be discriminated against and no terrorist would be able to enter a country visa free regardless of citizenship.

That sounds like just the sensationalist BS that George Bush and his cowboy cronies spurt out every time they do something that violates fundamental rights. You have more chance of being struck down by lightening, bitten by a shark or hit by a bus than you do of being a victim of a terrorist attack. Hardly justification for imposing visas on anyone.

Why do I say that?? Well if you are going to discriminate based on race or relligion it would mean alot of inocent people will get caught up in the system because they have been tarred with the same brush.. We all know not all Pakistani nationals are terrorist and by saying British nationals with Pakistani decent should apply for visas will stir up facial tensions between communities in the Uk.

Visas are fundamentally discriminatory by their very nature. It makes no difference whether you apply them to some select foreigners or every foreigner.

Australia had a universal visa policy for many years. (New Zealanders alone were exempted because of the "Trans-Tasman" agreement.) One of the reasons always given for this was that it was "fair". In fact, Australia still has a universal visa policy, although certain nationalities can now apply for an electronic visa, obviating the need to send (or take) one's passport to an Australian visa-issuing office. Is all this a good idea? Who knows. The rejection rates for tourist visas from many countries is extremely low, which makes one wonder if it is worth the effort.

There is a major difference between foreigners who are able to apply for an Australian eletronic visa and foreigners who have to apply for a sticker-type visa. Obtaining an eletronic visa is a mere formality with minimal checks done on the applicant, while those who have to apply for a sticker-type visa are subjected to usual discriminatory requirements that other first-world countries apply for their tourist visas.

[OL7MAX]

It's a good thing people like Richard Reid were born in Pakistan and have 100% Pakistani parents. It makes it easy for half wit US security to immediately spot his terrorist potential.

[sunnyday]

I think they have the right to do that. It's concerning their home land security. They don't do this just for fun.

[JAJ]

I think they have the right to do that. It's concerning their home land security. They don't do this just for fun.

Of course they have the right to do whatever they like. However if they do exclude Britain from the Visa Waiver Program (and don't exclude any other countries) then look forward to:

- a backlash against the Labour Party; and
- increased anti-American feeling in Britain with pressure for retaliation against the United States; and
- worse community relations, with one section of the community perceived to be responsible for this

In the light of recent revelations, there is however now a strong argument for the United Kingdom to take some pre-emptive action to impose a ban on British citizens travelling to certain countries (such as Pakistan) without a British government permit.