The oddest experience with a visa I’ve had was going into Croatia by train in 1996. I had been traveling in the area, even through Slovenia, and no visas were required anywhere for American travelers. At the Hungarian-Croatian border, the passport control comes aboard and starts checking passports. He gets to mine, flips through it, and says “you need a visa.” I’m thinking, oh shit, I have to go back, go to the embassy, apply, etc. Then he says “one month or three months?” Perfect. It’s one of these visas I can buy on arrival. “How much?” “They are free.” “Um, okay, then three months I guess.” So, a full page wasted on my passport for a free visa sticker. What was the point of this?
citizens of western countries can visit far more countries than those respective countries’ citizens can visit the relevant western country
e.g. as an american, you can travel to:
Peru
Ecuador
South America
Thailand
Mongolia
Ukraine
Morocco
etc.
without a visa, or without a visa-on-arrival. None of those countries’ citizens can travel to the US without a visa.
it’s not reciprocal, basically.
Just a nitpick, people traveling on a US passport do require a visa for Brazil, I suspect as revenge for the US requiring a visa from Brazilians. Brazil is one of the few countries where my South African passport allows me visa free access, but an American passport wouldn’t.
oh fudge. that was supposed to be South Africa.
haha
A friend of mine ran into that same situation when she tried to go to Brazil on vacation. She simply forgot about checking visa requirements.
IIRC, the airline had to fly her back to Miami (nearest US port of call on their schedule) where she went to the Brazilian consulate to get the visa, and she was back the next day. All at the airline’s expense, since apparently they were supposed to verify the visa in advance.
not only that, but in certain countries (the US is one of them IIRC) the airline gets fined for permitting someone on board who doesn’t have the appropriate documentation.
Australia certainly requires a visa before visiting, (unless you’re from New Zealand, in which case you can get one on arrival). I wound up in the situation where I could not leave Australia for NZ because I didn’t have a re-entry visa for Australia, so despite no visa being required for a British Citizen to visit NZ for a short time, I couldn’t prove it was a short visit, despite having a return flight from Aus, as I didn’t have a visitors visa from Australia valid for my return, and my current visa was shortly going to expire.
If you find this hard to understand, believe me, so did I, especially as I found this out at 6am at Brisbane airport. I had to buy a dummy ticket back to the UK from NZ before I could get on the NZ flight, and get it refunded as soon as I arrived.
I would advise you to be careful checking if things like that (visas for countries you plan to visit on leaving) are required before travel, even if you find that no visa is required for a short visit. I certainly will be from now on.
True, but however there are some countries that will require a visa but give it automatically (at the border, even) to residents from other (typically western) countries, and charge you for essentially stamping your passport, making their “visa”, in effect, a tax on tourism.
Nothing wrong with that, though. And of course even those obviously still have the option to actually deny granting said visa for whatever reason.
Perhaps to get a date of entry, so anybody checking your passport later would be able to see if you weren’t overstaying your visit.
See, they usually stamp your passport with that info when you cross the border, not issue a visa. Also, why ask “one month” or “three months” when it makes no difference? Just make it three months automatically.
just because the visa was free to you doesn’t mean it was free to everyone, though.
as to whether it’s a visa or a mere entry stamp, it’s a technical-ish distinction that while in your case may have been of no consequence is still a distinction that needs to be made, nonetheless.
take, for example, the US: the us does not allow visa-free travel into the US by a Briton. More precisely, the government waives the necessity of a pre-authorized visa, and substitutes the Visa Waiver Program in its stead. Compare this to Canadians, who are actually, by separate statute, waived of the visa requirement all together.
Brits will get a nice green I-94W in their passport (which is, effectively, a free [not really free as your airline ticket incorporates the cost] visa) and a passport stamp. Canadians just get the passport stamp.
Of course I would assume a Croatian visa wasn’t free to everyone. But I am trying to figure out 1) Why is the technical distinction necessary and 2) Why give me a choice of one month or three months, if it doesn’t make a difference?
the technical distinction may be because of treaties they’ve signed, or just the way the law is written. Can’t really answer it without knowing specifics about croatia, but one of the reasons is based in the fee: the law may mandate that all foreigners get visas, but americans get free visas and can get them at the port of entry, etc.
the one or the three months may be related to time limits (if you go in for 30 day visas, you can renew them, wheras if you go in for a 90 day one, you may not be able to get another visa for a year). or the border guard was just checking with you, instead of making assumptions. again, who knows?
I was curious if anyone actually knew. The next time I traveled to Croatia (two years later), it didn’t matter, as they just stamped the passports. The time limit didn’t seem to matter; we had volunteers who worked down there for two years, and they just hopped the border every three months and came back with a new, free visa. (I myself had two consecutive 3-month visas). It seemed very odd (and amusing) to me, and I could not for the life of me figure out any rhyme or reason for it.
If anyone can explain it, this is exactly what it looked like (it’s not mine–somebody just happened to have a scan up.) The visa doesn’t even have one’s name on it.
Definitely not free. If a Briton travels to the US from Canada by car, he has to pony up the $6.00 then and there; it’s only commercial carriers that incorporate the cost. Cash or credit card only. The visa they give does allow multiple entry and exit for three months, though, which is nice.
Sweet merciful crap! There are a lot of conflicting stories out there. :eek:
For all travel, one should check the website of the country one wants to visit. Then check your own country’s site. Referring here to the “Foreign Affairs, State Department, Foreign Office” type places.
Speaking as a Canadian, I need a passport to get into the US, UK, all of the Schengen Countries, and some East Asian ones. When I went to the UAE, a visa was provided upon arrival (not gonna happen now :mad: .
If I want to travel to Australia, I must apply in advance, $20.00 AUD at the embassy, or handled by the travel agent.
Long story short, get informed, and have fun in your travels. Also, if you ever fly to London, as you exit the aircraft and pass through “business class”, look for a pink folder left on a seat - FAST TRACK Customs - door of plane to outside in 10 minutes if you walk fast 
I like Canada too. Just adding my two cents.
There are actually people in the world who think international travel is like a drive to the local cinema and don’t check. Weird.
Another thing to check is the validity of your passport. I once arrived in Taiwan (with my US passport) and normally am allowed in under the visa waiver program. However, because there was less than 6 months left, I had to get a visa. They issued one on the spot, but it cost money where the visa waiver program doesn’t.