Editorial: Trump’s bizarre gold visa

There are many things, for lack of a better word, bizarre about the newly announced types of visa called Trump cards. The names Trump Gold, Corporate Gold, and Platinum cards not only smack of profiteering by a businessman instead of a policy initiative by a head of state. One cannot be faulted if it reminds them of banks peddling credit cards. The in-your-face dash of narcissism can only come from a strongman leader like US President Donald Trump. This new regulation is likely to sound a death knell to the much sought-after, cherished American dream of many smart, upwardly mobile Indians.

Another shocker by the Trump administration that has stumped Indians was the mass cancellation or postponement of thousands of pre-scheduled interviews for work and dependent visas (H1B and H4) in different consular offices. The arbitrariness, one-sided decision-making, and adamant refusal to engage with stakeholders, which have characterised this regime in recent years, are neither surprising nor shocking. What is, however, inexplicable is the naivety of Indians and the myopic politics of the establishment regarding Trump politics. Even the ruling party at the centre, which is known for its political guile, cunningness, and more than a smidgen of pragmatic skullduggery, has found itself cornered by Trump and his administration on Operation Sindoor or bilateral trade talks. Since the Indian government is preoccupied with wriggling out of trade talks with something honourable to show and without much loss of self-respect, it is doubtful if they can use their good offices in this case.

A tighter and more stringent vetting and screening of the social media and digital activities of applicants is said to be the purported reason for the cancellation of visa interviews. According to the US State Department website, visa applicants were “instructed” to adjust the privacy settings on all of their social media profiles to “public” to enable scrutiny. The broader screening would include checking social media accounts for the past five years. It is only fair that the government put in place a process to weed out applicants who could harm Americans and the national interest. But the process appears to be opaque, and speculation is that it may not align with the free speech doctrine of a democratic country.

Interestingly, Trump referred to Indian students when announcing the new visa regime. He justified the new scheme, saying it would enable companies to recruit and retain top-notch talent from India and China who pursue higher education in the US. It is not clear how many companies, even large ones, would shell out USD 2 million as a contribution — a non-refundable “gift” to the government — for every employee they want to hire at entry and mid-level positions, in addition to steep processing fees.

Certainly, the costs will be prohibitive for small and medium-sized enterprises and entities with limited resources. Also, affluence gets priority over meritocracy.

“A US visa is a privilege, not a right,” proclaimed the US government. True, every sovereign country reserves the right to decide who can be its guests, residents, or citizens. But spewing hardline anti-immigrant rhetoric and initiating draconian actions without much concern for fairness and human suffering flies in the face of the history of colonisation of America by European immigrants. Like other Trump decisions, in this case too, there may not be any finality as yet.