Skip to main content

Narendra Modi must be Prime Minister to be automatically eligible for US diplomatic visa: Congressional report

Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi must become Prime Minister of India in order to get a diplomatic visa for the US. This is the crux of the new Congressional Research Service memorandum “Visa Policy: the case of Narendra Modi”, written by Ruth Ellen Wasem, specialist in immigration policy, made public on March 18. In her categorical statement, Wasem says, “If Narendra Modi were to become Prime Minister of India, he would automatically be eligible for A-1 (diplomatic) visa as head of state, regardless of the purpose of his visit.”
The rider of “if Narendra Modi were to become Prime Minister” should appear as a clear disapproval of Modi’s policies in Gujarat, say observers. While the Congressional report is being widely interpreted, including by the New York Times, as “the prospect of keeping Modi out of the US is looking dimmer and dimmer”, Wasem’s analysis provides two different scenarios under which Modi can get visa. The first is “if” he becomes Prime Minister, and the other is, in case he remains Gujarat chief minister.
In the latter case, according to Wasem, “If chief minister Narendra Modi sought visa to come to the US today, he would likely to be applying for a B visitor visa. The B-1 visas are visitors for business and other purely local employment or hire. The B-2 visas are granted to temporary visitors for ‘pleasure’ otherwise known as tourists. His role as the chief minister of Gujarat does not provide eligibility to enter as a diplomat on A visa. Ambassadors, consuls, and official representatives of foreign governments enter the US on A visas.”
Pointing out that only in case the Government of India certifies him as “part of a special diplomatic mission or delegation could he apply for A visa”, Wasem suggests, even then, getting the A category would not be so easy, as it would require a lengthy procedure. This procedure would require the US diplomats to get themselves satisfied that Modi is a “key contact, who promotes US national interests, mission goals, or public diplomacy efforts”, and is a “prominent individual who is not a contact, but is well known, such as a nationally-known figure.”
In fact, the researcher says, Modi’s visa application would have to be examined under the US law International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, which states that “any alien who, while serving as a foreign government official, was responsible for or directly carried out, at any time, particularly severe violations of religious freedom… is inadmissible.” As it was on the US Commission on International Religious Freedom’s (USCIRF’s) advise Modi was denied visa in 2005 for 10 years, the option of looking into his role in the 2002 riots would still be open.
While considering his visa application, the US government would look into India's National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) report which said Modi “was widely accused of being reluctant to bring the perpetrators of the killings of the Muslims to justice”. It would also see other reports, including the one prepared by the special investigation (SIT), appointed by the Supreme Court, which found “no substantial incriminating evidence” against Modi. At the same time, it would consider the Gujarat High Court criticism of Modi for “inaction and negligence” during the violence.
The US Congressional report, interesting, does not stop here. At the very fag end, it quotes President Barrack Obama’s August 2011 order, which says the President, if he so wishes, can prohibit “the entry of any foreign national” who is “detrimental to the interests of the US.” The order specifically says the US president can cancel order of a foreign national in case he has “planned, ordered, aided, abetted, committed or otherwise participated in, including through command responsibility, widespread or systematic violence against any civilian population … on race, colour, descent, …indigenous group, language, religion…”
The research paper was prepared on the basis of a query by Representative Joe Pitts, Republican of Pennsylvania, and Representative Keith Ellison, Democrat of Minnesota, who have “a track record of criticizing Modi”, says the New York Times, adding, On November 18, 2013, Pitts introduced House Resolution 417, which called for the US to continue to deny Modi a visa and argued that ‘the Gujarat government has not adequately pursued justice for the victims of the 2002 violence.’ Today, the resolution has 44 co-sponsors, including Ellison.”
Quoting sources in the US Congress, the New York Times believes, this was the “last ditch attempt” by Pitts and Ellison “to see what can be done to block Modi’s visa.” It adds, “This perhaps explains why the congressmen asked the Congressional Research Service about existing legal options to challenge a decision to grant a United States visa to a foreign national, but Wasem, an immigration specialist, said she was unable to answer the question” and the issue would be addressed separately by “Margaret Mikyung Lee”, a legal expert.

Comments

TRENDING

Dalit rights and political tensions: Why is Mevani at odds with Congress leadership?

While I have known Jignesh Mevani, one of the dozen-odd Congress MLAs from Gujarat, ever since my Gandhinagar days—when he was a young activist aligned with well-known human rights lawyer Mukul Sinha’s organisation, Jan Sangharsh Manch—he became famous following the July 2016 Una Dalit atrocity, in which seven members of a family were brutally assaulted by self-proclaimed cow vigilantes while skinning a dead cow, a traditional occupation among Dalits.  

Powering pollution, heating homes: Why are Delhi residents opposing incineration-based waste management

While going through the 50-odd-page report Burning Waste, Warming Cities? Waste-to-Energy (WTE) Incineration and Urban Heat in Delhi , authored by Chythenyen Devika Kulasekaran of the well-known advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability, I came across a reference to Sukhdev Vihar — a place where I lived for almost a decade before moving to Moscow in 1986 as the foreign correspondent of the daily Patriot and weekly Link .

Boeing 787 under scrutiny again after Ahmedabad crash: Whistleblower warnings resurface

A heart-wrenching tragedy has taken place in Ahmedabad. As widely reported, a Boeing 787 Dreamliner plane crashed shortly after taking off from the city’s airport, currently operated by India’s top tycoon, Gautam Adani. The aircraft was carrying 230 passengers and 12 crew members.  As expected, the crash has led to an outpouring of grief across the country. At the same time, there have been demands for the resignation of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah, and the Civil Aviation Minister.

Global NGO slams India for media clampdown during conflict, downplays Pakistan

A global civil rights group, Civicus has taken strong exception to how critical commentaries during the “recent conflict” with Pakistan were censored in India, with journalists getting “targeted”. I have no quarrel with the Civicus view, as the facts mentioned in it are all true.

Whither SCOPE? Twelve years on, Gujarat’s official English remains frozen in time

While writing my previous blog on how and why Narendra Modi went out of his way to promote English when he was Gujarat chief minister — despite opposition from people in the Sangh Parivar — I came across an interesting write-up by Aakar Patel, a well-known name among journalists and civil society circles.

Remembering Vijay Rupani: A quiet BJP leader who listened beyond party lines

Late evening on June 12, a senior sociologist of Indian origin, who lives in Vienna, asked me a pointed question: Of the 241 persons who died as a result of the devastating plane crash in Ahmedabad the other day, did I know anyone? I had no hesitation in telling her: former Gujarat chief minister Vijay Rupani, whom I described to her as "one of the more sensible persons in the BJP leadership."

Why India’s renewable energy sector struggles under 2,735 compliance hurdles

Recently, during a conversation with an industry representative, I was told how easy it is to set up a startup in Singapore compared to India. This gentleman, who had recently visited Singapore, explained that one of the key reasons Indians living in the Southeast Asian nation prefer establishing startups there is because the government is “extremely supportive” when it comes to obtaining clearances. “They don’t want to shift operations to India due to the large number of bureaucratic hurdles,” he remarked.

Guha plans book to counter Dalit, Marxist, and right-wing critics of Gandhi, recalls Modi’s 'pernicious lie' on Patel

Let me first confess: writing about an event three weeks after it has taken place is no good, especially for a newsperson. However, ever since I attended the public lecture by well-known historian Ramachandra Guha on May 18, organised by Sarthak Prakashan for the release of the Gujarati edition of his book monumental book "India After Gandhi", frankly, I kept wondering if he had said anything newsworthy apart from what had already appeared in the media ever since the book's first edition came out in 2007. Call it my inertia or whatever.

Two decades on, hunger still haunts Gujarat: Survey exposes stark gap behind poverty claims

A Niti Aayog report , released about two years ago, estimated that in Gujarat — which our powers-that-be have long considered a model state — 11.66% of people are "multidimensionally poor," a term referring to an index that seeks to estimate "multiple and simultaneous deprivations" at the household level across three macro categories: health, education, and living standards.