121–130 of 269 posts
This is really bad reporting. It isn't just US citizens, click here for a list of the 57 countries that will also require ETIAS in 2021: https://etias.com/about-etias/who-needs-etias It even includes the island of Palau and their population of 20,000 people: https://etias.com/about-etias/etias-for-palauan-citizens This has nothing to do specifically with the US.
The article mixes two seaparate issues: - EU is introducing ETIAS, an electronic authorisation system which is pretty much modeled after the US ESTA system (used by visa-free nationals). It will apply to all countries which currently enjoy the visa-free regime with the EU and that includes USA. So, technically it is not a visa, but your details will be pre-checked and it will cost €7 (compared to $14 for US ESTA). Ir…
Tit for tat is a great model in pre-school. The more mature response is to investigate the underlying issues. Instead of putting your fingers in your ears and yelling “We are EU, you must treat us all the same” there could be some acknowledgement that travelers from those countries are disproportionately overstayers and there is a justifiable reason to need to more closely track them. If US travelers are overstaying…
And it is more like the super-rational tit for two tats strategy anyway. The US is _appallingly_ bad at meeting its international obligations, it routinely signs treaties with other countries only to subsequently decide it doesn't fancy sticking to its side of the bargain but of course it demands they fulfil their end...
All countries (including the US) agreed to the Vienna Convention, which says to let the other country know if its citizen gets arrested or hospitalised and requests consular assistance by their people.
The US completely ignored this, routinely holding foreigners without an interpreter on the rationale that hey, they aren't _citizens_ so they don't have rights... And hey, how we were supposed to know that he was saying he wants consular assistance, he said he wanted to talk to his family, and we said "No" but we never refused consular assistance...
The US Supreme Court decided that if US police do this it's just fine. No civil rights violation. Sure, the foreigner had "rights", but if police prevent them exercising those rights? Eh, whatever, they are American police, and Americans come first... "My country, right or wrong, my country" yeah?
So lots of countries that the US is supposedly friends with signed an additional treaty with the US which basically says OK, fine, even if our citizen doesn't make it clear that they need consular assistance, tell us immediately anyway.
Are you guessing that the US complied and now it's fine? Of course not. Now the US routinely says that it tried to contact consular services but alas other operational priorities meant it took a few days to get around to it...
[ Back when it was her job, Hilary Clinton struggled to get ordinary Americans who ultimately are responsible for implementing these rules to understand Tit for Tat. You beat up the "weird foreign guy acting strange" and lock him in a jail cell for a week "to teach him a lesson". Now how are the US consular team supposed to persuade a Parisian genndarme to let some American idiot get on a plane home instead of leaving him to rot for starting a drunken fight in a restaurant? ]
Your country treats other countries badly. Under the circumstances I think they've been exceedingly nice about it and I think it's more than time the EU threw the book at the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really. States are not countries.
Why does that matter? There are huge differences culturally and socioeconomically between different states (and even areas). States have very different laws with a "federal government" managing it all. I don't see how it's very different from EU member states and the EU in Brussel managing it all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tit for tat is a great model in pre-school. The more mature response is to investigate the underlying issues. Instead of putting your fingers in your ears and yelling “We are EU, you must treat us all the same” there could be some acknowledgement that travelers from those countries are disproportionately overstayers and there is a justifiable reason to need to more closely track them. If US travelers are overstaying…
Just a few points: - Tit-for-tat response is a geopolitical reality. Regardless whether you think it is pre-school model or not, this is what pretty much all countries do, as it is a perfectly rational way (and sometimes even the only way) to defend your interests. By rational I am talking about the Game Theory kind of rational. :) - You suggest to look at each EU country individually (just also keep in mind that the…
Though not too different from imposing trade sanction on those products that hit some states much harder than others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you support the ETIAS initiative? As a EU citizen I benefit from freedom of movement within the EU, why would I want extra barriers being erected between nations? I struggle to see a benefit here, just downsides. Edit: I don't seem to have been clear. I know intra EU travel will remain unencumbered, my point was to illustrate that both the parent and I have been benefiting from that unencumbered travel, so why…
How is that hard to understand? Why should we treat US citizens visiting the EU better than the US is treating EU citizens entering the US?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hawaii isn’t a sovereign nation with its own foreign service.
It’s an analogy as Hawaii is one of the 50 United States. The EU Schengen zone is similar to the US as there is free travel between countries within the zone.
If you're from a big country like France or Germany, you don't notice, but if you're from a smaller country like Portugal this means when you realise your country does not even have consular facilities in the random place you're visiting, you don't worry, the French or Germans do and you're an EU citizen, so they'll sub for your own consular officials as needed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
are you ok with EU imposing visas for some US states and not for others?
How would they do that given US states do not have citizens or passports?
As a point of order, US states do have citizens. As a US citizen, I'm also a citizen of the state in which I reside.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tit for tat is a great model in pre-school. The more mature response is to investigate the underlying issues. Instead of putting your fingers in your ears and yelling “We are EU, you must treat us all the same” there could be some acknowledgement that travelers from those countries are disproportionately overstayers and there is a justifiable reason to need to more closely track them. If US travelers are overstaying…
Due to the nature of the Schengen area and the greater independence of an EU member state compared to a US state, there's no real way to track whether a US citizen overstays more in some parts of the Schengen area than others. And I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that at least some of the EU member states in question are on track to join Schengen before the time ETIAS launches in 2021.
Doesn't matter, it's 90 days applied to the entire Schengen area, regardless of which member state(s) you visited.
Hindering access to the EU may be a minor nuisance on the surface. But its a harbinger of worse things to come and undermines the unprecedented peace and stability we've seen in the world in the last 75 years.
1) massive number of scam sites charging tons of money to submit your application (hopefully)
2) doesn’t crash on the first day
3) doesn’t exempt rich people that come by private plane (unlikely)
4) still allows EU nationals to get into EU with the Canadian or American passports. I’m technically an EU citizen by lineage, but havent bothered to get that passport since I don’t even speak the language.
It will probably still have to loophole if flying into a non-EU country and then driving in.