7 ms·
the visa requirement for those countries were a formality, never being denied. it was just reciprocating the visa requirement of Brazilians to visit those desti
by gcb0 8y ago
the visa requirement for those countries were a formality, never being denied. it was just reciprocating the visa requirement of Brazilians to visit those destinations. it was a way to press for more international access for the citizens.
this action makes it clear that the current administration is giving up any hopes of international influence, a great shift from the previous workers party administration's stance, which was Brazil to be a leader of the BRICS
- Scoundreller 8y ago> it was a way to press for more international access for the citizens. Does it work against large/rich countries? The US and Canada are being forced to allow visa free travel for Romanians and Hungarians, so their response has been to create a visa that’s not a visa.
- bulgarians 8y agoActually its Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Poland and Romania
- Scoundreller 8y agoMost recently, It was just the 2 I had mentioned for Canada. But it depends how far you want to go back. E.g. visas for Croatians used to be required, but scrapped a long time ago.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- sizeofchar 8y agoYour second paragraph is ideological gibberish. Brazil was always miles distant from leading BRICS, which is merely a buzzword to captivate through vanity the minds of theirs political elites. By playing international influence game, the workers party managed to overflow Brazilian market with cheap and unfairly produced Chinese industrial goods, paying for it by selling most of our mineral commodities and committing with money-sink international projects with African dictatorships. At the same time, the aforementioned party gave billions of dollars in infrastructure projects throughout Latin America bolivarian states, that without a doubt won't make returns in any way. If that is what you call "international influence", I'm relieved we gave it up.
- roberto 8y ago> At the same time, the aforementioned party gave billions of dollars in infrastructure projects throughout Latin America bolivarian states, that without a doubt won't make returns in any way. First and foremost, the money went to Brazilian companies that built that infrastructure. Second, it was a loan that has to be paid back by those governments. Third, the loan is covered by insurance.
- marcosdumay 8y ago> First and foremost, the money went to Brazilian companies that built that infrastructure. In every loan that got investigated, the money seems to have gone into corrupt politicians pockets, both inside and outside of Brazil.
- sizeofchar 8y agoNot only this, but even if the money comes back anyhow (and I am casting doubt on it, never heard of any insurances) all the international influence built will be lost, because it was done specifically for the parties of some countries supporting tyrants. There was no plan for Brazilian international relevance, but a plan for colluded political parties, to disintegrate nationalities.
- thraway-burnout 8y ago> money-sink international projects with African dictatorships. You mean like those projects that China funds to successfully increase their international relevance and financial prosperity? Like all the ports and plants and railways?
- sizeofchar 8y agoThat’s it! For the Chinese they were great. What was gained by Brazil, if not some temporary seats on some international bureaucracy, with hardly any Brazilian commons ever hearing of it?
- 8y ago
- nbardy 8y agoI visited Brazil with an American passport a few years ago and ended up spending a bunch of time gathering documents and visiting the embassy back and forth. It was pretty discouraging and draining and I thought about not going. Potentially turned away tourists, but now I also I understand what it's like to go through the process and I'm a big proponent of more free borders. It's a double edge sword, but it certainly left a similar impact on the other Americans I met in Brazil as well.
- dep_b 8y agoYour problem is that you don't have an American passport, you have a United States passport. It would be pretty nice if American passports would exist.
- seppin 8y agoYou do know that "American" is shorthand for citizen of the USA in everywhere else in the world, right?
- thraway-burnout 8y ago> I visited Brazil with an American passport a few years ago and ended up spending a bunch of time gathering documents and visiting the embassy back and forth. It was pretty discouraging and draining and I thought about not going. That is the same as when a Brazilian would like to visit the US. This general waiving of requirements simply guarantees that Brazil's the only one getting the short end of the stick. A negotiated reciprocal agreement would be much better.
- Fomite 8y agoThe visa requirements necessitated me going to San Francisco to apply in person, which was a non-trivial expenditure of both time and money.
- molmalo 8y agoThat was the idea, just to reciprocate what Brazilian (or Latin American citizens in general) have to do to get a visa for the USA.
- schoen 8y agoOne funny part of the implementation of reciprocity is that you could pay a visa expediter to actually deliver the passport and visa request without going to the consulate in person, whereas the U.S. consulates abroad don't allow this option. That means that the reciprocity was often more financial than, well, experiential.
- thraway-burnout 8y ago> whereas the U.S. consulates abroad don't allow this option. I wouldn't know whether this is allowed or not, as I never had use for such a service, but I know a few people myself who used an expediter in Brazil ("despachante") to ease the process of getting a U.S. visa.
- schoen 8y agoHuh! Do you know what the expediter does in this case? Don't the visa applicants still have to visit the U.S. consulate in person for an interview?
- thraway-burnout 8y agoAs far as I know it has to do with documentation, easier scheduling of the interviews for people who live far away from the consulate, as well as some queueing thing. Clearly I know very little.
- wenc 8y ago> it was just reciprocating the visa requirement of Brazilians to visit those destinations. it was a way to press for more international access for the citizens. If this was the case, did the strategy work? I'm not sure if there are any countries that reversed its Brazil visa requirement due to reciprocity. Visa policies typically don't sway to political actions like reciprocity unless the country has some kind of leverage. I love Brazil but on this front I feel it overestimated its geopolitical importance (speaking as someone who went through the trouble to get a 5-year Brazil visa and am happy I no longer need one).
- marcosdumay 8y ago> this action makes it clear that the current administration is giving up any hopes of international influence That's not a honest evaluation. The current administration is giving up negotiation power on getting Brazilians more freedom of movement in exchange of facilitating foreigners tourism into Brazil. You are free to disagree with the government's priorities, but you can't deny it is a meaningful exchange (it is not simply giving up stuff), and that it's aligned with its campaign promises, that people overwhelming approved (as 4 of the top 5 candidates had similar proposals).
- KorematsuFred 8y agoBrazil as a leader of BRICS ? Whoever believed that must be smoking something strong. China and India would be the main contenders for that place and China is at least 3x more powerful than India. Brazil can not have much international influence. Sadly, USA has played a deliberate role in keeping South American countries crime ridden and unstable. Brazil is at max a weak colony of USA.