Features

Immigrant communities and their news media were quick to respond to the implementation this week of a program that fingerprints and photographs most foreign visitors upon entry to the United States. 

Reaction came from both established U.S. communities as well as their home countries and ranged from cautious optimism to swift retaliation.  

The Department of Homeland Security unveiled the US-VISIT program at 115 airports and 14 seaports on Monday as part of the ongoing anti-terror campaign. Visitors from all but 28 mostly European countries, those that normally do not require tourist visas for a stay of more than 90 days, are subject to checks—totaling some 24 million travelers a year.  

Visitors from all countries traveling on work or student visas or for more than 90 days must abide by the new rules.  

The Washington-based National Council of Pakistani Americans (NCPA) cautiously welcomed the US-VISIT program saying it was a much better alternative than a predecessor program which required men from mostly Muslim nations to register with immigration officials and resulted in more than 13,000 slated for deportation, 2,800 detainees and 143 arrests. 

“The new fingerprint program is less discriminatory and does not just target Muslim visitors. It is clearly not anti-immigrant,” said NCPA president Faiz Rehman. He said with only $380 million allocated to the program this year, his group was more concerned about long delays at ports of entry.  

In a Jan. 5 editorial headlined “Security: At What Price?", Pilar Marrero, political editor with Spanish-language daily La Opinion, wrote that the new security measures may turn out to be a good idea and perhaps helpful in terms of preventing a new terrorist attack, but also comes with a heavy price. The fingerprinting measures are also in effect along the U.S.-Mexico border. 

She writes, “Yes, it is clear things are not the way they used to be and with time there will be more and more control over society. Good or bad, the issue is that this does not resolve the deeper problems and the real reasons for the conflict.” 

The new U.S. regulations drew a sharp outcry from overseas, however. 

Last week a federal judge in Brazil described the U.S. actions as xenophobic and ruled that Brazil would begin fingerprinting and photographing U.S. visitors, who are now experiencing delays at Brazilian airports as they are registered, according to Brazilian daily newspaper websites on Jan. 5.  

Brazil’s government is considering an appeal to overturn the ruling, citing fears that tourism revenue will be hurt—but that may prove hard to do. A legislator from the governing Workers’ Party told the Jornal do Brasil daily in Rio de Janeiro that the retaliatory measures should be upheld and also should be expanded to other nations in the South American economic bloc known as Mercosur, which is led by Brazil, and includes Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay.  

“If Brazilians are being registered in the United States, then Americans should receive the same treatment here,” Rep. Doutor Rosinha, who sits on a committee that oversees Mercosur relations, was quoted as saying. “All of Mercosur could adopt the same procedure, basing its decision on international law.” 

None of the Mercosur countries, or associate members Chile and Bolivia, are exempt from the U.S. fingerprinting program. 

The U.S. embassy in Seoul, Korea was forced to defend the program criticized heavily by Korean civic groups, according to the bilingual Korea Times.  

Korean activists were concerned over a possible violation of human rights as well as misuse of the biometric information collected and stored by U.S. federal officials. 

The U.S. Embassy official said in a statement that a country has a right to protects its citizens and preserve its sovereignty.  

Seoul’s Foreign Affairs-Trade Ministry officials said the country has no immediate plans for quid pro quo and subject U.S. citizens to a similar registration process as Brazil has done. 

“It’s difficult to apply outright reciprocity on U.S. citizens, in consideration of bilateral trade and tourism agreements as well as overall relations with the U.S. We’ll have to see how other countries deal with the matter,’’ a senior ministry official said. 

At San Francisco International airport, many Indian nationals who were subject to the regulations for the first time seemed not to be bothered by them at all. “Most said it added only an extra 15 to 20 seconds to the process,” said San Leandro-based India-West writer Rupal Shah. 

Kishore Kumar, a visitor who flew into San Francisco from Delhi told India-West upon his arrival, “It will help U.S. officials keep better track of possible terrorist threats and there isn’t much extra time needed at customs.” 

Ravi Tumber, a U.S. citizen who was receiving friends from Delhi was more skeptical about the program. “I think it’s a worthwhile program, but I don’t know how accurate it will be,” he said. “If someone really wants to harm this country and it’s citizens, they will find a way, no matter what country. If they can do it from one country, they can do it from any country.”  

Marcelo Ballve and Sandip Roy contributed to this report.