Trump eyes massive travel ban expansion to 43 countries
- Paul Aage Hegvik
- Mar 15
- 6 min read
Updated: Mar 16
The Trump administration is considering a major expansion of travel restrictions, targeting 43 countries in three categories: full visa bans, partial restrictions, and conditional limits.
The proposed measures divide countries into three categories: full visa suspensions, partial visa restrictions, and conditional restrictions. The administration argues that these measures aim to address security concerns, including inadequate identity verification, weak passport controls, and limited information-sharing between governments.
Still not official
As of now, there are no direct comments from President Trump regarding the proposed expansion of the travel ban affecting 43 countries. The administration has according to Newsweek and other media outlets not released an official statement, and President Trump has not publicly commented on the matter.
In a related development, President Trump issued a memorandum on January 29, 2025, directing the expansion of the Guantanamo Migrant Operations Center to accommodate up to 30,000 migrants. In the memorandum, he stated:
This memorandum is issued in order to halt the border invasion, dismantle criminal cartels, and restore national sovereignty.
Full visa suspensions
🔴 (Highest restriction level)
Eleven countries are expected to be placed on the red list, meaning all U.S. visa applications from these nations would be suspended indefinitely:
Afghanistan
Bhutan
Cuba
Iran
Libya
North Korea
Somalia
Sudan
Syria
Venezuela
Yemen
These nations have been identified as high-risk due to security concerns and insufficient cooperation with U.S. authorities.
Partial visa restrictions
🟠 (Moderate restrictions)
A second group of nations falls under an orange list, where travelers could face restrictions on certain types of visas, such as tourist, student, and work visas:
Eritrea
Haiti
Laos
Myanmar
South Sudan
These restrictions aim to limit access to the U.S. while still allowing certain categories of travelers under stricter vetting.
Conditional restrictions
🟡 At risk of future bans)
The yellow list includes 26 countries that could face restrictions if they do not improve security measures within a 60-day period. These countries must strengthen passport security, increase cooperation with U.S. intelligence, or take other measures to avoid potential penalties:
Angola
Antigua and Barbuda
Belarus
Benin
Burkina Faso
Chad
Djibouti
Gabon
Ghana
Guinea
Liberia
Madagascar
Malawi
Mali
Mauritania
Namibia
Niger
Pakistan
Sao Tome and Principe
Sierra Leone
Tanzania
Togo
Turkmenistan
Uganda
Uzbekistan
If these nations fail to meet the U.S. government’s requirements, they could face similar restrictions as those on the orange or red lists.
Why Bhutan at the red list?
Critics have questioned the inclusion of certain nations, such as Bhutan—known for its low crime rate—while major global powers like China and India are notably absent. The inclusion of Bhutan on the potential red list is surprising, given that it is one of the world's most peaceful nations, with no history of terrorism or security threats. The U.S. government’s justification likely falls under administrative and security concerns rather than direct threats. Here are some possible reasons:
Bhutan has a relatively low-tech passport system and limited biometric security measures. The U.S. may see this as a risk for identity fraud or document forgery, making it easier for unauthorized individuals to enter the country.
Bhutan is a small, isolated nation with limited diplomatic engagement with the U.S. It may not have the infrastructure to share intelligence, criminal records, or immigration data at the level Washington requires.
Sometimes, smaller nations are included in travel bans to pressure them into upgrading security systems or aligning with U.S. policies. Bhutan’s inclusion could be more about setting a precedent rather than an actual security risk.
This case highlights how the U.S. travel restrictions don’t always seem to align with a country’s actual security situation, leading to criticism that these bans are politically or administratively motivated rather than purely based on security threats.
Political and legal implications
This proposal is reminiscent of the Trump administration’s previous travel bans, which faced legal challenges but were ultimately upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. The current plan is still under review and would require approval before being implemented.
Criticism and global reactions
Opponents argue that the list appears arbitrary and may not effectively address security concerns. Some have pointed out that countries with significant security risks, such as China and Russia, have been excluded. The potential travel restrictions could impact international relations, business, and family reunifications, making this a highly controversial policy shift.
Significant implications
The travel restrictions on 43 countries has significant implications for Afghan nationals, particularly those who served as translators for NATO and U.S. forces. Afghanistan is among the 11 countries listed for a complete visa suspension, a measure that directly affects these individuals who risked their lives to support military operations.
Many Afghan translators have already faced challenges in securing Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) due to bureaucratic hurdles and lengthy processing times. The proposed travel ban exacerbates their plight, leaving them vulnerable to Taliban reprisals without a viable path to safety. Advocates and veterans have expressed deep disappointment, urging the administration to fulfill its commitments to these allies who put their lives at risk.
The inclusion of Afghanistan in the travel ban not only undermines the sacrifices made by these individuals but also sends a discouraging message to local partners in current and future U.S. military engagements. It highlights the need for policies that honor commitments to those who assist U.S. forces, ensuring their safety and acknowledging their invaluable contributions.
Pressure on Cuba
Specific to Cuba, the U.S. Department of State has criticized the Cuban government for its support of terrorism and for providing assistance to individuals involved in violent activities. This stance has contributed to the consideration of travel restrictions on Cuban nationals.
Additionally, the longstanding U.S. embargo against Cuba, which has been in place for decades, reflects ongoing concerns about the Cuban government's policies and actions. The proposed travel restrictions are part of a broader strategy to apply pressure on the Cuban regime to change its behavior and policies.
Exploited?
Antigua and Barbuda's inclusion on the U.S. administration's «yellow list» stems from concerns over certain security practices. The primary issues highlighted include:
Citizenship-by-Investment Programs (CBI): The nation offers according to Antigua News CBI schemes that allow foreign nationals to obtain citizenship through investment. Critics argue that such programs can be exploited by individuals from countries with restricted access to the U.S., potentially circumventing standard vetting processes.
Passport Security and information sharing: There are apprehensions regarding the robustness of passport security measures and the adequacy of traveler information sharing between Antigua and Barbuda and U.S. authorities. These deficiencies could hinder effective background checks and pose security risks.
Key arguments for the lists
The U.S. government justifies the proposed travel restrictions based on three key arguments:
The administration claims that some countries fail to properly screen travelers, increasing the risk of terrorism, espionage, or criminal activity. Nations like Iran, Syria, and North Korea are cited for ties to terrorism or hostile actions against the U.S.
Countries with unreliable passport systems or poor border control are labeled security risks. The U.S. argues that nations like Somalia, Sudan, and Haiti lack proper documentation processes, making it easier for criminals or fraudsters to enter the country undetected.
Some governments allegedly fail to share criminal records, biometric data, or security information with U.S. authorities. Nations such as Eritrea, Pakistan, and several West African states are seen as uncooperative in intelligence-sharing efforts.
The administration presents these measures as necessary to protect U.S. borders, though critics argue the lists are politically motivated and disproportionately target developing nations.
As of now, there have been no official public responses from the countries potentially affected by the proposed U.S. travel ban expansion. The list of 43 nations, categorized into three levels of restrictions, is still under review and has not been finalized. Historically, countries targeted by such bans have expressed concerns over diplomatic relations and the impact on their citizens. Once the list is officially announced, affected nations may issue formal statements or take reciprocal actions in response to the U.S. policy.
