Schengen vs American visa — and Pakistan

After several unpleasant incidents and personal experiences, I can no longer resist drawing a comparison between the relatively liberal American visa regime and the increasingly restrictive European (Schengen) visa policies.

Let me cite a few recent examples that raise a fundamental question: why do major European countries — Britain, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands) treat all Pakistani visa applicants with suspicion and distrust? Why do visa officers — often junior officials — paint all Pakistani applicants with the same brush, as if each one intends to overstay or vanish upon arrival in Europe, regardless of their professional or social standing?

The Schengen Idea

The Schengen Agreement, signed in 1985 and implemented in 1995, was founded on a simple but powerful principle: freedom of movement. Its goal was to eliminate internal borders among member states, enabling unrestricted travel for citizens, boosting trade and tourism and fostering deeper European integration.

However, this freedom now comes with high security expectations and increasingly strict visa regulations — even for socio-politically significant individuals. European authorities often claim that everyone, regardless of wealth or status, must follow the same process. Even former heads of state or billionaires must provide proof of purpose, accommodation, travel insurance, financial stability and more.

These stringent requirements stem from legitimate concerns over illegal migration, terrorism and abuse of asylum systems. A "zero-risk" approach has been adopted — one that applies to everyone, regardless of prestige or background.

But here lies the contradiction: the US faces far greater migration pressures from its southern borders, yet it maintains a far more liberal visa policy. Many applicants, even today, receive five-year multiple-entry visas.

In contrast, Schengen visas are often issued as single-entry permits, valid for just a few days, not even weeks.

Schengen and Pakistanis

Let's turn to some real-world examples.

A close friend — currently the head of a nationally renowned private university and formerly a holder of one of the most prestigious public positions in Pakistan — was recently invited by a political foundation of Germany for a weeklong visit.

The result? An 8-day Schengen visa with multiple entries. Despite impeccable credentials and documentation, the visa officer clearly ignored his stature and issued a visa that barely matched the length of the invitation.

Another case: my nephew, a high-earning professional working with a top Silicon Valley tech company, had his UK visa application rejected on the absurd grounds that he had "too much money" in his bank account.

This, despite providing months of financial records and tax returns amounting to millions in income. Why should a young, well-paid IT professional, rooted in Pakistan, be rejected on such frivolous grounds?

A different nephew, also a well-placed professional, recently submitted a Schengen visa application with over 50 pages of supporting documents — bank statements, letters from employers, invitation letters, and more. He now anxiously waits to learn whether all this effort will result in a visa — and for how many days.

As for me, the last time I applied for a Schengen visa a couple of years ago, the outcome was similarly disappointing. Despite high-level references, I received a multiple-entry visa valid for just 14 days. This, for someone who has traveled to more than 40 countries, holds a respectable professional profile, and has never overstayed a visa.

Worse, the visa was issued with a delay, forcing me to cancel my planned travel altogether.

A Stark Contrast: US and Canada

Unlike the Schengen system, the US and Canadian visa regimes remain relatively liberal. They typically issue multi-year visas, do not require detailed hotel bookings or rigid travel itineraries and allow greater flexibility for spontaneous travel within the country.

This flexibility is invaluable for frequent travelers, especially professionals who may wish to extend their visits or explore additional destinations.

An Eroding European Narrative

Since that last experience, I have not traveled to a Schengen country — nor do I wish to deal with the intrusive questions and restrictive conditions that no longer seem aligned with my age, status or travel history.

Many Pakistanis express similar frustrations — not only with the EU, but increasingly also with visa policies in China, the UAE and Qatar, which have grown more restrictive, even for tourism. However, these are mostly authoritarian states with unique systems.

The real issue here is the EU's inconsistency. The EU has long prided itself on values of liberalism, human rights and openness. It has historically welcomed visitors and immigrants. But current visa practices contradict this ethos.

Today, legitimate, well-placed Pakistani applicants are treated the same as potential asylum-seekers or undocumented migrants. The broad-brush approach applied to Pakistani nationals is not just disheartening — it undermines the very ideals the EU claims to stand for.