Secretary of State Rubio announced yet another wave of visa revocations, this time for foreign nationals and/or officials who censor U.S. citizens or companies. On X, Rubio specifically addressed European and Latin American governments, declaring an end to “passive treatment for those who work to undermine the rights of Americans.”
Like we have discussed in our recent articles, the Trump Administration has implemented various new (mostly restrictive) policies towards visa holders and temporary residents in the United States. Whenever we see sudden policy changes, the best practice is to ask ourselves why and consider the different factors that could influence our government’s decision-making.
First, we should consider the promises and commitments that President Trump made both during the election campaign and in office, and how the pressure to make good on those promises can spur aggressive action. President Trump made immigration a focal point of his presidency, committing to various changes: starting a massive deportation campaign, ending birthright citizenship, implementing ideological screening for foreign students, and more. While there’s obviously red tape around many of these issues—delaying the Trump Administration’s goals—they have undoubtedly remained zealous in their efforts; restraining orders, injunctions, and protests have not deterred them. Announcing another batch of visa revocations further showcases that the administration isn’t dissuaded and will continue to enact the policies it chooses.
Second, the United States has a distinct position of influence and power in the international order, one that has gone relatively unchallenged. Naturally, it wants to remain in that position. Did you know that scholars have formed theories to try and explain why countries interact with each other in the way that they do? They want to figure out what motivates them, what their values are, what causes problems between them. One of these theories is realism, and it sees international relations as a power struggle; a battle between countries to see who can make it to the top of the food chain. The actions of the current US government align with this perspective. They are using visas as a mechanism to assert US dominance, leveraging them as a bargaining chip. This is especially clear given that the targets of the new visa revocations are foreign officials and/or private actors with significant influence, not foreign students.
Third, policies are announced publicly, but they are created behind the scenes. The government informs the public of policy decisions once they’ve already been made. We aren’t privy to the decision-making process, the discussions between government actors surrounding the risks and repercussions of whatever policy is being considered. Regardless, that shouldn’t prevent us from engaging critically with what we do know. In this case, visa revocations are being used as part of the administration’s strategy to “make America safe again.” What does the decision to use visas as a foreign policy tool tell us about how the Trump Administration views immigration and the role it plays in our border security?
I’m not suggesting that the visa revocations are right or wrong. I simply want to encourage us all to think beyond our gut reactions and take time to evaluate these new changes, whether they directly affect us or not. Understanding the intricacy of decision-making and the possible motivators guiding the administration’s actions is not only part of becoming an informed citizen, but it deepens our engagement with the governing body that has so much influence over our lives.
Brenna Patterson holds Bachelor of Arts degrees in Political Science and International Studies from NC State. Originally from Argentina, Brenna loves learning about different cultures, international politics, and our global community. Outside of work, she enjoys reading, baking, and exploring the outdoors.