Proposed Expansion of Travel Ban by Trump Administration Targets 43 Countries
The Trump administration is proposing a new travel ban affecting up to 43 countries. A draft categorizes these into tiers, with 11 nations facing a complete ban, while 10 more would have restricted access. Officials are reviewing various factors before final recommendations are made.
The Trump administration is contemplating implementing a travel ban targeting as many as 43 countries, which would be broader than previous restrictions during his first term. A draft list created by governmental officials categorizes these countries into three tiers regarding travel restrictions.
The “red” list consists of 11 countries whose citizens would face a complete ban from entering the United States: Afghanistan, Bhutan, Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. This list has been circulated among the State Department officials, though further modifications may occur before it reaches the administration’s final decision.
Additional scrutiny is being applied by officials within embassies, regional bureaus, and intelligence agencies, as they assess the accuracy of the listed deficiencies in these nations. There are considerations regarding policies that may affect international cooperation, prompting discussions about whether some countries should remain on the list.
Furthermore, the proposal features an “orange” list, which includes 10 countries where travel will be restricted but not entirely prohibited. Wealthier business travelers might still be permitted entry akin to previous measures, although individuals seeking to enter via immigrant or tourist visas would still be denied access.
In summary, the Trump administration is actively considering an extensive travel ban that could affect up to 43 countries. The draft includes a comprehensive plan categorizing countries into tiers, with a strict exclusion for certain nations deemed high-risk. Additionally, it reflects the administration’s intention to adapt policies based on diplomatic relations and economic considerations. These developments suggest ongoing internal discussions regarding national security and immigration policy.
Original Source: www.nytimes.com
