The Trump administration is considering a travel ban targeting citizens of up to 43 countries, categorizing them into tiers. The proposed “red” list includes 11 countries facing total entry bans, while an “orange” list restricts access for 10 countries, mainly affecting immigrant and tourist visas. Assessments and potential changes are ongoing as the list is reviewed by officials.
The Trump administration is contemplating a new travel ban affecting up to 43 countries, aiming to impose broader restrictions than those experienced during the previous presidential term. Officials privy to the discussions highlight a draft list categorizing countries into three tiers based on their citizens’ eligibility to enter the United States.
The proposed “red” list includes 11 countries whose citizens would face a total ban from entering the United States: Afghanistan, Bhutan, Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. This list was generated by the State Department several weeks ago and may undergo revisions prior to reaching the White House.
Diplomatic and security personnel at various embassies and within the State Department are currently evaluating the draft. They are assessing the accuracy of the deficiencies cited in each country and whether it is prudent to reconsider certain inclusions based on other diplomatic priorities that could be impacted.
Additionally, the draft contains an “orange” list comprising 10 countries where travel restrictions would apply, permitting affluent business travelers to enter while barring those on immigrant or tourist visas. This approach seeks to balance national security concerns with diplomatic relationships.
In summary, the Trump administration’s proposed travel ban could encompass 43 countries, categorizing them into three tiers of restrictions. The countries on the “red” list face total entry bans, while the “orange” list imposes restrictions that allow certain business travelers access. Evaluations of the draft list are ongoing, focusing on the justifications for inclusion and potential diplomatic repercussions. This proposal marks a significant expansion of travel restrictions compared to previous policies.
Original Source: www.nytimes.com
