Will going digital really simplify applying for a Schengen visa?

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent in any way the editorial position of Euronews.

Digitalisation, although well-intentioned, may well lead to more complexity for the applicant and more of a workload for consular staff, Michel Dejaegher writes.

ADVERTISEMENT

The European Parliament is developing plans to reform visa application procedures in the Schengen area by moving from a system where travellers are required to apply in person to get physical visa stickers to a digital system instead.

The idea is that no longer will travellers apply for individual visas; instead, they’ll apply for an EU visa through one EU visa platform, which will allow them to download an e-visa directly to their smartphone.

All applicants will be required to do is to upload electronic copies of their travel documents along with other supporting materials, followed by the payment of the visa fees.

This has the potential to streamline the visa application process immensely for travellers and it is to European governments’ credit that they have reached an agreement on this in principle.

And, in theory, it sounds like a seamless visa application process. But in practice, I can foresee a number of difficulties.

Different countries, different rules

When you have one country on its own introducing a digitalisation process, you apply one set of rules and regulations and there is a single national authority harmonising and checking the practice of consulates. 

It is not an easy task, but it does not reach the level of complexity encountered when such a digitalisation process must be implemented across nearly 30 different countries.

In theory, the Schengen visa system is based on identical rules and regulations. It is mainly true, and it is quite an achievement, as national policies can be very different. However, there are still many exceptions, which a digitalisation platform will have to integrate.

First, the platform will have to inform applicants whether they need a visa or not. Most visa waivers are common. 

However, there are national exceptions such as employment (some Schengen member states do not apply the visa waiver if the third-country national is due to take employment), for airline and ship crews, holders of diplomatic or service passports and school children.

Second, a harmonised list of supporting documents needs to be displayed. To date, common consular lists have been established, but when you examine them, you realise that these lists are generic and rather vague — whereas if those supporting documents must be uploaded by applicants, they have to be very precise and limited.

Varying requirements might lead to confusion

Supporting documents are not always the same, either. For example, French consulates require a formal and secured invitation by a family member or a friend whereas other member states accept different types of invitations. 

It’s the same for the financial resources: the daily minimum amount is not the same for every Schengen member state. 

And as a traveller may visit several countries during his short stay, the platform will have to check not only which Schengen country is competent to examine the visa application (considering the rather vague concept of “main destination” where there is room for appreciation), but also record the number of days spent in each country so that the amount of financial resources may be calculated.

A related issue is because the platform intends to require the applicant to pay the Schengen visa fees online, national exceptions to the common fees will have to be integrated.

In short, the online application process will mean lots of questions being asked of the applicant which makes it very confusing for them.

Some countries already ask (or intend to ask) external service providers — such as outsourcers — to scan all pages of the travel documents of visa applicants in three different colours as a security precaution. 

The EU regulation, as it is now, provides for only a copy of just the identity page in one colour. However, I don’t believe Schengen governments will want to reduce this level of security.

ADVERTISEMENT

The road to Schengen is paved with good intentions

My sense is that digitalisation, although well-intentioned, may well lead to more complexity for the applicant, meaning consulates could be inundated with queries, which will create more of a workload for consular staff.

So, either Schengen governments could allow unregulated commercial intermediaries to assist applicants at a high price without any control — or, as I foresee, continue to regulate external service providers to provide controlled visa processing and support services, reducing the burden on the applicant and the consulate.

Indeed, many countries already use outsourcing services for providing logistic non-judgmental assistance to issuing visas, passports, and consular services. 

The introduction of external service providers was aimed at solving the problem of the time pressures on consulates and embassies from a growing number of applicants and the need to record their biometric data, together with increasing security measures in consulates. 

The time-consuming task of receiving applicants, accepting, and managing visa applications, checking applicants’ documentation is correct and collecting their biometric data is transferred to external service providers. 

ADVERTISEMENT

This has allowed consular services to focus on the essential task — granting or refusing the application — rather than getting bogged down in the administration or queries in processing the application.

In the era of smartphones and technological progress, digitalisation can certainly be an advance. But it will almost certainly require external service providers to make the process work smoothly.

Michel Dejaegher is a former head of the French Central Visa Department and former French consul general in Algeria, Canada and Japan. He represented France in the Schengen visa working group and is a co-writer of the European Union Visa Code.

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at [email protected] to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

Source link

#digital #simplify #applying #Schengen #visa

Don’t ban Russians. Ban Putin’s imperialism instead

The destructive and hawkish ideology of Vladimir Putin and his mafia state cronies should be persecuted just like any other aggressive and undemocratic system of beliefs, Aleksandar Đokić writes.

Each time a case of verbal or physical abuse by Russian-speaking people against either Ukrainian refugees or liberal and outspoken citizens of the EU is reported, a new wave of debate revolving around banning tourist visas for Russian citizens appears. 

ADVERTISEMENT

This kind of backlash is to be expected as long as Russia’s war of aggression rages on in Europe. 

Many Europeans are rightfully outraged by the criminal, atrocities-riddled actions of the Russian state, in turn feeling threatened by anything remotely Russian. 

While it is a human reaction, it can at times resemble the dread of anything Muslim, Arabic, or even remotely Middle Eastern in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States.

Is this blanket response truly justified, or is it a knee-jerk reaction based on black-and-white thinking? 

What is truly ‘Russian’, after all?

For starters, how do we define someone being “Russian”? Is a “Russian” any person holding a passport of the Russian state? 

Around a fifth of the Russian population is of non-Russian ethnicity and there are a lot of cases of unreported (in the official census statistics) dual or mixed identities, that came about historically due to the presence of many different cultures and nations in what is today the territory of the Russian Federation. 

Unless we engage in the dubious practice of determining one’s actual ethnic identity in their name, it is very hard to determine who is “Russian”, and if our aim is a blanket ban on all travel from Russia itself, we will end up hurting many of those who aren’t ethnically Russian at all or do not associate themselves with the Russian state.

This kind of oversimplification of ethnic identity that would result in holding a grudge against perceived ethnic Russians or any person who speaks Russian as a mother tongue would be a serious step back and away from the ideals embraced by the European states of today.

Democratic political systems cannot participate in such practices, reminiscent of the long-forgotten phrenology. 

What political systems can ban is an ideology which inspires and feeds these unwanted behavioural patterns, especially hatemongering, warmongering, or any verbal or physical act of demeaning people based on their identity and background.

This is why European countries should ban Russian imperialism as an ideology, and persecute it like they persecute other forms of extremist ideologies such as Neo-Nazism or violent extremism. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Travelling on a tourist visa doesn’t have to mean it’s for pleasure

This brings us to the main point: why are we still debating tourist visas for Russians after 19 months of the Russian full-scale invasion of Ukraine?

Why do we constantly and exclusively debate the presence of Russian tourists in Europe, when millions of Russian nationals have been emigrating to the West for decades prior to the war against Ukraine and have already become citizens of various Western countries? 

Some of these people remain proponents of Russian imperialism and spread it online or through political activism without any consequences or punishment by law. Yet, we still seem to be more infuriated by tourist visa holders.

But tourism is a luxury, not a right, correct? Yes and no. 

Viewed solely as an act of receiving pleasure from breaking the habits of mundane life by travelling to a different and exciting place — it is certainly a luxury. 

ADVERTISEMENT

When viewed as an escape route from a repressive autocratic system that is in place in Putin’s Russia, it ceases to be a luxury and starts to be a necessity. 

For some, leaving Russia on a tourist stamp in their passport was the only way to not end up in the country’s terrifying and intentionally harsh prison system, or worse. For others, it meant not being forced to pick up a gun and participate in the aggression in the neighbouring country.

Some might rightfully ask, but aren’t there procedures for people like that to receive political asylum, besides using tourist visas? There are, but they have proven to be very ineffective, as they haven’t produced tangible results in the last year and a half. 

What European and other Western states have not done yet is come up with a clear policy on what they would like to see from the holders of Russian passports they keep letting in.

Let’s attract the best and the brightest instead

A major gain for Europe and the West would be to focus on attracting two groups of people holding Russian passports: highly skilled specialists (with their families) and members of the educated progressive circles, including youth. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Instead of debating tourist visas, which can be taken away at any moment by political decree, the Western states should adopt a unified political demographic strategy toward the Russian Federation.

If swift administrative procedures are put in place which would make it possible to provide an accessible escape route to those holders of Russian passports with a desire to emigrate to the West, while possessing either highly valued skills or a progressive worldview, the question of tourist visas wouldn’t even come up. 

This kind of strategy would deal a political and demographic blow to Putin’s Russia, while simultaneously strengthening the democratic world, both economically and morally. 

While Russia would further deteriorate, already trapped in its own quagmire, the West would once again become a haven of liberty, and the Russian youth would fight to be a part of it tooth and nail.

It’s all about persecuting Putin’s imperialism

In the heat of the moment, it is easy to forget that the free world is not in a struggle against everything and everyone Russian. 

The battle is being waged between the ideal of the free, democratic order and the Russian revanchist state, whose official propaganda partly relies on the bellicose ideology of Russian imperialism.

The destructive and hawkish ideology of Vladimir Putin and his cronies should be persecuted just like any other aggressive and undemocratic system of beliefs, no matter if its proponents are Russian tourists or already naturalised immigrants from the USSR or Russia. 

A strategy, which would attract progressive holders of Russian passports and give the West the upper hand in the political strife against the most dangerous challenger to peace in Europe today, is direly needed.

In the meantime, let’s keep in mind that a European tourist visa is often the only way for those Russians who refuse to participate in Putin’s mafia state to escape the consequences of saying “no” to its toxic, murderous face. 

Aleksandar Đokić is a Serbian political scientist and analyst with bylines in Novaya Gazeta. He was formerly a lecturer at RUDN University in Moscow.

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at [email protected] to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

Source link

#Dont #ban #Russians #Ban #Putins #imperialism

The European Union should ban Russian tourist visas

By Mark Temnycky, Journalist, Nonresident Fellow, Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center

Vacations and foreign travel are luxuries, and preventing Russian citizens from going abroad would force them to think twice about their government’s actions, Mark Temnycky writes.

After scaling a mountain on a humid summer day, my cousins and I reached the top of St John Fortress in Kotor. We took a moment to enjoy the view from the summit, nearly 300 metres above the Montenegrin coastal town.

ADVERTISEMENT

After catching our breath, we reached into our bag and pulled out a Ukrainian flag. A customary tradition, we always take a photo with it during our annual trips.

We took a second to pose with our flag at the fortress and requested a neighbouring tourist to take our picture. 

But this encounter was different. As we stood for a photo, another group of tourists gave us unpleasant looks.

“Ukrainians,” one of them snarled in Russian, eyes cold with contempt.

We quickly finished taking our photo, packed our flag, and descended down the fortress. As our group continued on our walk, the discomfort among us became palpable as we came across additional Russian tourists who gave us similar stares.

Is everyone in Russia truly brainwashed?

Unfortunately, this was not an isolated incident. Following this encounter in Montenegro, I experienced similar events while in Cyprus and Greece. 

During my visits, Russian tourists did not shy away from glaring at me or making judgmental comments about my being Ukrainian.

This is Russia today. Over the past 19 months, many have mislabeled the Russian invasion of Ukraine as “Putin’s war,” blaming the current circumstances on the Russian president.

But the hatred toward Ukrainians goes far beyond Vladimir Putin. According to recent polling data, most Russians support their country’s aggression against Ukraine. 

Survey participants also stated that they want the war to continue. These are not opinions or expressions of a freedom-loving people.

Some might argue that Russian citizens are heavily influenced by Russian propaganda. After all, the Kremlin controls the media and survey centres within Russia. 

ADVERTISEMENT

But with a country of 143 million, it is hard to believe every single citizen has been brainwashed.

While Ukraine is burning, Russians head to the beach

Russia’s war has been devastating. Over the past 19 months, tens of thousands of Ukrainians have perished. Numerous cities and villages have been ravaged. 

Ukraine’s agriculture has been destroyed, and some experts believe that it will take over €1 trillion to rebuild the country.

To make matters worse, one-fourth of Ukraine’s population is displaced. The United Nations estimates that “90% of the refugees from Ukraine are women and children”. 

In addition, Ukraine has enforced martial law since the war began in February 2022, meaning men aged 18 to 60 cannot leave the country. 

ADVERTISEMENT

In short, these Ukrainian men, women, and children do not have an opportunity to go on vacation or extravagant adventures this summer. 

Instead, they constantly live in fear, trying to avoid the dangers of the ongoing Russian invasion.

While Ukrainians seek safety from these attacks, citizens from the aggressor state have been living in peace. According to a France24 report, 22.5 million Russian citizens travelled abroad in 2022, an increase of 3.4 million from 2021. 

As these tourists visited beach towns and major cities, this came at the expense of millions of Ukrainians who were constantly hiding in bunkers and shelters, ensuring they were away from Russian missile strikes.

There is something morally wrong with this. Why should Russian tourists have the privilege of going on their lavish European adventures while they support the atrocities committed by their country in Ukraine?

ADVERTISEMENT

Vacations are a luxury, after all

To be fair, the international community has already implemented harsh sanctions on Russia, such as the removal of several Russian banks from SWIFT, the expulsion of the Russian Federation from international groups such as the G20 and the Council of Europe, and a ban on Russian sports teams from international competitions. But more can be done.

Imposing restrictions on Russian tourist visas would send a powerful message to the Russians. 

To date, millions of citizens have been able to travel freely, presenting a false impression that the situation in Ukraine is normal. 

Instead, Russians should be punished for the actions of their government. 

Vacations and foreign travel are luxuries, and preventing Russian citizens from going abroad would force them to think twice about their government’s actions.

The EU remains divided on welcoming Russian guests

To some degree, the European Union has started to enforce restrictions. Countries such as Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Finland, and Poland have stated that they would “bar entry to Russians holding Schengen Area tourist visas”. 

These countries believe that Russians should not be permitted to travel to Europe while the unnecessary and illegal invasion continues. 

They also believe that additional pressures should be imposed on the Russian Federation to end the war.

But there is division within the EU. While those in Eastern Europe support stiffer penalties, the countries of Western Europe have a different attitude. 

According to a Euronews report, Germany, France, Portugal, and Spain believe Europe should not cut itself entirely from Russia. 

These opinions are ill-advised and only signal to the Russians that their government can continue to do as it pleases without harsher penalties.

There is also the issue of money laundering

Aside from the moral dilemma, banning Russian tourist visas would also combat the influx of dirty money in major European capitals. 

For years, European officials called on stricter laws to scrutinize Russian money laundering, tracing Russian money, and even implementing a task force to examine Russia’s financial influence in Europe. 

These efforts have been exhausted, and they are both slow and time-consuming.

Yet, implementing a visa policy that would restrict or ban Russian tourists in Europe would dramatically reduce the flow of Russian cash. 

In addition, European governments should continue to freeze and seize the assets of Russian politicians and oligarchs. 

This would help Europe in its fight against corruption, and it would lead to the continuation of anti-corruption efforts in major European capitals as they eliminate the use of Russian money.

It’s time to show that actions have consequences

The Russian Federation’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine has been deadly and catastrophic. 

But as Ukrainians continue to suffer, Russian citizens have reaped the benefits of European travel. It is time for the EU to take a harsher stance on Russian tourist visas. 

Russia should be penalised to the fullest extent for its war in Ukraine, and these punishments should not be eased until the war has ended, Ukraine’s 1991 borders are restored, and the country is rebuilt. 

Only then will the Russians learn from the consequences of their actions.

Vacations and international travel are a luxury, not a right. It is time to teach the Russians this.

Mark Temnycky is an accredited freelance journalist covering Eurasian affairs and a nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center.

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at [email protected] to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

Source link

#European #Union #ban #Russian #tourist #visas