US issues latest India travel advisory with warnings about solo women travellers, conflict and crime
The US has issued a new travel advisory for India, maintaining guidance for solo female travellers and significantly escalating the severity of its warnings in light of ongoing ethnic violence in Manipur, recent terror attacks in Jammu and Kashmir and issues at the borders with Pakistan and Nepal.
The update, issued by the State Department, includes a greater emphasis on the risks of violent crime, sexual violence, regional unrest, and immigration issues at land borders, particularly for solo women travellers and those entering India from neighbouring countries like Nepal.
The State Department considers India as a whole a 'Level 2' country for travellers, where 1 is the riskiest and 4 means Americans are urged 'do not travel'. While its categorisation of India has not changed, the language of the updated 2025 advisory includes sharper warnings in several key areas.
Among the most prominent changes are new warnings about immigration enforcement and land border crossings. It specifically advises US travellers not to enter India via the India-Nepal border.
'US citizens are advised not to cross the India-Nepal border by land due to the risk for immigration-related detention and fines,' the advisory states.
The Indian government does not accept electronic visas at land border checkpoints, and even those carrying physical visas have reportedly encountered legal issues, it added.
Regional travel restrictions have also been tightened. The advisory now has an expanded section with a clear 'do not travel' directive for the state of Manipur, citing ongoing ethnic violence and instability.
'Ongoing ethnic-based conflict has resulted in reports of extensive violence and community displacement. Attacks against Indian government targets occur on a regular basis,' the advisory said, adding that US government employees working in India need prior approval before they visit the state.
The warning stems from the two years of sustained ethnic violence between the Meitei majority and Kuki-Zo tribal communities that began in May 2023. Clashes have killed over 250 people, displaced more than 60,000, destroyed thousands of homes and religious structures, and there continue to be shootings and deadly crossfire incidents involving civilians and security forces.
Similarly, the northeastern states of Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Assam, Mizoram, Nagaland, Meghalaya and Tripura, which were previously grouped under a level 3 'reconsider travel' guidance, now also have a more detailed section on the risks associated.
Warnings about the Jammu and Kashmir region remain in effect, excluding Leh and eastern Ladakh. The advisory reiterates that foreigners are prohibited by Indian law from visiting areas near the Line of Control – the de facto border between India and Pakistan in the contested Himalayan region – and that terrorism and civil unrest continue to pose threats in Srinagar, Gulmarg, and Pahalgam. These cautions have been in place for several years and remain unchanged in the June 2025 update.
The advisory does, however, reflect the aftermath of the 22 April terrorist attack in Pahalgam, where gunmen opened fire on tourists in the Baisaran Valley, killing 26. It was the deadliest attack on tourists in the region in over three decades.
Other recurring elements of the advisory have been retained, including warnings about restrictions on carrying satellite phones or GPS devices into India. These are still prohibited by Indian law and violators may face severe penalties, including large fines of up to $200,000 (about £150,000) and jail time.
The advisory also continued to highlight the risks of travelling to regions affected by Maoist insurgency in eastern Maharashtra, Telangana, Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand, and West Bengal. Travel to these areas by US government personnel remains subject to special approval.
The advisory retained language stating that 'rape is one of the fastest growing crimes in India' and warned that women are particularly vulnerable, especially at tourist destinations. It urged US citizens, 'especially women,' not to travel alone.
It also identified certain public venues where the risk of violent crime or terrorist attacks is perceived to be high. The updated language named tourist locations, transportation hubs, markets or shopping malls, and government facilities as sites where a terrorist attack could take place without warning.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
34 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Boy, 6, battling cancer is seized by ICE outside Texas courthouse
A Honduran mother has sued ICE and the Trump administration after she and her cancer-stricken six-year-old son were arrested by agents outside a Los Angeles immigration court. The woman, who is not named in court documents, said they violated her family's rights by detaining them at a Texas facility, despite their lawful efforts to seek asylum in the U.S. In a scathing petition filed in San Antonio federal court, her lawyers argue that the arrest was unconstitutional and traumatic, especially for her young son who has undergone chemotherapy for acute lymphoblastic leukemia. The young boy urinated on himself and remained in wet clothes 'for hours' during the traumatic arrest, according to the documents. 'They're asylum seekers fleeing from violence, who had an appointment at the border, were paroled into the country and the government made an assessment that they didn't have to be detained,' said attorney Kate Gibson Kumar of the Texas Civil Rights Project. 'There should be some sort of protection for this family, which is doing everything right.' The lawsuit claims the mother and her kids were taken into custody without warning on May 29, immediately after a judge granted dismissal of their asylum case at the government's request. The woman had objected, telling the court, 'We wish to continue [with our cases],' according to legal filings. The family - already facing death threats in Honduras - had been living in California with relatives while attending court hearings, going to church, and enrolling the children in local public schools. But shortly after leaving the courtroom, all three were arrested in the hallway by ICE agents and taken to a nearby facility, where they were allegedly held for hours. Her son, who was due for a medical check-up on June 5, missed the appointment due to the arrest. According to court documents, all three 'cried in fear' during the ordeal. They were later flown to San Antonio and transferred to the South Texas Family Residential Center in Dilley, Texas - where they remain in detention. Kumar slammed the move as cruel and unnecessary. 'So often, you'll hear all the rhetoric in this country that immigrants should be doing it 'the right way,' and it's ironic in this case because we're in a situation where this family did it 'the right way' and they're being punished for it,' she told the Los Angeles Times. Kumar added that the government never gave the mother a chance to contest the detention before a neutral judge - violating her Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. Federal officials pushed back, saying the case is unfolding lawfully. 'This family had chosen to appeal their case - which had already been thrown out by an immigration judge - and will remain in ICE custody until it is resolved,' said DHS assistant secretary for public affairs Tricia McLaughlin. As for the boy's cancer, McLaughlin noted that 'the minor child in question has not undergone chemotherapy in over a year, and has been seen regularly by medical personnel since arriving at the Dilley facility.' She also insisted that 'ICE ALWAYS prioritizes the health, safety, and well-being of all detainees in its care.' 'The implication that ICE would deny a child the medical care they need is flatly FALSE, and it is an insult to the men and women of federal law enforcement,' she said. But according to the lawsuit, the family was left in limbo - with the children crying each night and praying 'for God to take them out of the detention center.' The mother says her son went days without proper monitoring for his cancer. Her legal team is now asking a judge to block their deportation and to release them from detention, warning that returning to Honduras would place the family in grave danger.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
India rejects statement by Pakistan seeking to blame it for Waziristan attack
June 29 (Reuters) - India's ministry of external affairs said on Sunday it rejects a statement by the Pakistan Army seeking to blame India for Saturday's attack in Waziristan. A suicide bomber rammed an explosive-laden car into a Pakistani military convoy in a town near the Afghan border, killing at least 13 soldiers, the Pakistan army said on Saturday. The convoy was attacked in Mir Ali area of North Waziristan district, the army said in a statement.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
People are just realizing why there are still ashtrays in airplane bathrooms
If you've ever noticed an ashtray in an airplane bathroom and wondered why it's still there despite the no smoking signs lighting up all around you - you're not alone. Even though smoking has been banned on all US flights for more than two decades since 2000, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) still requires ashtrays to be present near airplane lavatories. The reason? Some passengers still just can't resist lighting up at 35,000 feet. The FAA says people still try to smoke onboard and airlines need a safe way for them to take the light out. 'The installation of an ashtray on or near the lavatory door will ensure that uninformed persons who find themselves with lighted smoking materials on the airplane will have an obvious location to dispose of smoking materials before entering the lavatory,' the FAA explains. The FAA believe it's better to have a designated place to extinguish a cigarette than risk a smoker tossing it into a trash bin full of paper towels and flammable waste. A European flight attendant, who previously worked for a major US airline, told Marketplace she has personally caught multiple passengers trying to sneak a smoke mid-flight. 'What people don't understand is that a fire on board is one of the most scary things to have,' she told the outlet. The FAA regularly investigates 'unruly passenger' reports and lighting up on the flight is included. In 2021, the FAA proposed a whopping $16,700 fine against one Allegiant Air passenger who was caught smoking in the bathroom. Although the FAA itself can't press criminal charges, it can refer extreme cases to the FBI. The agency also can impose civil penalties of up to $37,000 per violation. Also in 2021, a woman on a Spirit Airlines flight to Fort Lauderdale was walked off by police after lighting up a cigarette on the tarmac, drawing scorn from fellow passengers. The unnamed woman pulled out a cigarette after the plane took more than an hour to make its way to the terminal after it arrived at the Florida airport from Detroit. It is not clear why it took that long to taxi. Alexa Majdalawi, 31, who was sitting behind her and has asthma, told Fox News at the time: 'She literally took out a cigarette and just started smoking.' Majdalawi said the woman 'turned around' and blew it in her face. And just this April, a brazen business-class passenger was caught on camera vaping on a flight - with footage showing the premium flyer sneakily tucking the device beneath a cushion between each inhale. The incident, which involved a male passenger seated in executive class, took place on a Garuda Indonesia flight from Jakarta to Medan, Indonesia, on March 27. A shocking clip shows the passenger, who had been filmed by a fellow flyer, subtly lifting the e-cigarettes to his lips from under a red cushion placed on his lap. A former flight attendant who worked on planes in the 1970s previously revealed to Daily Mail that the cigarette smoke on planes used to be so thick her makeup would drip down her face. Mary Mckenna recalled her memories of working on American Airlines from 1976 to 2010. While her career had many highlights, the now-outlawed act of smoking during flights posed various concerns for her. She recalled: 'The smoke was so intense on the plane that my eye makeup would be dripping down my face, I couldn't breathe.' Mary also explained that she would have to take extra caution to watch out for passengers falling asleep with lit cigarettes in their hands due to the fire risk.
