Is it likely that other countries will refuse to allow Americans to travel/vacation/visit in light of our current government situation? Would the EU take a stance that their citizens can’t go to the US, nor can Americans darken their soil? Could tourist and business dollars be an effective weapon?
I think our current epidemiological situation would be more likely to trigger such actions.
Good point - I had not considered that.
Wouldn’t preventing Americans from spending money in the EU be shooting themselves in the foot?
At the same time as refusing to let their citizens spend money in the US? Wouldn’t that send a message, along with potentially other actions? And if enough of them banded together, would it send a message of “We don’t want to deal with us any longer”?
I don’t know - that’s why I asked.
Certainly countries could block US citizens from entry but it is not likely. Doing so tends to provoke retaliation. Countries don’t tend to block another country’s citizens from entry based on value judgments about that other country’s government.
If it reaches the point where Americans become a refugee problem (not likely) Americans may find it harder to get a visa.
It is possible that evidence of vaccinations might become compulsory. That used to be quite common.
I would doubt that countries would block us visiting. That said, it could be fairly uncomfortable for Americans to visit places where we’re not wanted, with outright violence being possible.
I’m in the UK - we would find it fairly easy to restrict entry to people who couldn’t prove they had specific vaccinations. My other thought (with the potential for becoming refugees) was that you may be required to provide evidence of a return or onward flight/travel plan, and also that you have insurance that would cover medical or repatriation costs.
Refusing entry and not allowing to go are two different things. European states like Germany or Spain do not forbid their citizens to go anywhere they want: you could visit North Korea, Djibouti, the Gaza Strip, South Sudan, Ukraine or whatever country lets you in. They may warn you not to go, be it for political reasons (visiting Russia is not advised, as they like to take you hostage for flimsy reasons like drug possesion so they can exchange you for spies, murderers, and other undesirables who got caught) or for security reasons (war, civil war, rampant kidnapping, epidemic outbreaks…). The Auswärtiges Amt (Foreign Office) publishes lists of countries assesing their travel status, including the ones it advises not to visit. But if you go, good luck. Perhaps there is no diplomatic post in that country, so a friendly country may have to step in, like when a Swedish citizen who worked for the EU got arrested in Iran a couple of years ago. Same would apply to US citizens if they travel to Iran, I guess. I presume Canada would assume the diplomatic representation of US citizens in those kind of countries, if they do have relations with them, or Swizzerland perhaps.
As for refusing US citizens entry into a country it would be a foolish European country that provokes the temper tanTrump in this way: retaliations, insults on Xitter, tariffs and carpet bombing may follow. But there is always the possibility to use administrative barriers, like forcing the traveler to prove they have the means to live during the stay, and a return ticket, plus a health insurance with adequate (!) coverage, vaccines or a test on object permanence skills. Countries can also demand visas, which depending on the situation may be difficult to obtain (ah! the opening hours of our Consular Representation have changed again! so sorry, come again mañana!) or very expensive. All this may lead to retaliation from the USA.
Or you let the person in question in and arrest them immediately and accuse them of being a spy (see again Russia, Bielorussia and North Korea). Gives you a much better negotiating possition than refusing entry outright. To state the obvious: people in general, not just US citizens, should think twice before going to those countries and only do it for a very good reason.
Notable sidebar, the leader of the NDP, Jagmeet Singh, has called on PM Trudeau to uninvite Trump from the upcoming G7 summit. There’s legal standing: Canada typically doesn’t let convicted felons enter the country. But of course our feckless leader has shut that down.
It was a fanciful notion, and of course the situation plays into FFOTUS’s image of legal invulnerability, but I suspect had Trudeau told Trump to piss up a rope, every country that’s currently weighing how low they should be kowtowing to Trump might grow some diplomatic balls of their own, not to mention we’d have some seriously stalwart allies in any conflict to come, economically or militarily.
Agreed. It’s the “land of liberty”, the US, that prohibits its citizens from visiting another country for political reasons.
Why should we? Why aid a hostile power?
In 1952, 1953, 1954, and 1955, the US prevented its citizen Paul Robeson from traveling to Canada to give a concert. Organizers–some of them those “far leftists” from another thread–arranged for him to give large amplified open air concerts across the border from just inside the US border at the Peace Arch in Blaine, WA.
I just read (somewhere) the suggestion that countries might start requiring Americans to have vaccination certificates. Especially for measles, which is highly contagious.
That should be interesting. My husband has a card from his pediatrician will all his vaccines, and I have something which has the same purpose, but looks very different. I think WHO has a standard certificate, but most people don’t have such records.
Of course, those who want to travel internationally tend to have the monetary resources to pay for additional testing, etc. which may be needed to prove vaccination status.
I could see a rise in isolationist superiorism among right wing citizens of this country, where they pretend that they don’t actually want to leave the country, when the truth is that they just aren’t wanted for very good reasons.
It looks that way to me:
Fifty-one percent of Americans now have passports, up from 46% in 2023 and 30% in 2008.
51% is very low, even if the article wants to sound optimistic protraying it like record numbers.
I’m Canadian and I have no formal vaccine record other than Covid. My kids do, as they were needed for school. My paediatrician has been dead for decades and my GP from 6-20 is too.
Same here. My pediatrician has been dead for years, and the only vaccination records I have are for the Covid vaccines I got a few years ago.
I will say that as a child, I got more shots than a dartboard. My mother made sure of that. Vaccines, TB tests, boosters of various sorts, if medical science could prevent it, Mom was all for it. And I never got polio, diptheria, or whooping cough, at least. But it seemed like every time I visited the doctor, I got a shot of some sort.
I was born before the MMR vaccine, and did end up with measles and mumps, and chicken pox. Had they developed the MMR vaccine back then, I have no doubt it would be the reason for another trip to the doctor. But no records of those long-ago vaccinations remain.
Immunity can be documented even if the vaccine records no longer exist, and for that matter sometimes it’s good to check immunity anyway. This happens often with people born outside the U.S. who apply for green cards, in which case it’s required to document either vaccination or immunity for a bunch of things. Lots of people no longer have childhood vaccination records, so the doctor can do a blood test. (I did it myself when nobody could figure out whether I had ever been vaccinated for chickenpox and my sister came down with shingles.) I hadn’t, because that vaccination didn’t exist yet when I was at the age to receive it, but by doing the test I learned I had no antibodies for mumps, ether, so I redid that one in my 40s. I don’t believe the test was particularly expensive, possibly less than the cost of a passport even at inflated American prices.