Trump Targets Nigerians in Visa Crackdown on Birthright Citizenship Firstpost Africa
In a renewed immigration crackdown, the Trump administration has issued a warning to Nigerians against traveling to the U.S. with the primary intent of giving birth — a practice aimed at securing automatic citizenship for their children under the U.S. Constitution. Nigeria remains among the top countries involved in so-called 'birth tourism.' The U.S. Embassy in Nigeria has also introduced tougher visa rules, including issuing mostly single-entry, short-validity visas. This move is part of broader restrictions targeting African nations, including higher visa fees, tighter interview rules, and increased digital screening — all under Washington's push to curb immigration loopholes.
See More
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
25 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Back to Cold War era? Russia ends nuclear treaty as Trump sends nuke submarines into position
Synopsis Russia has formally dropped its self-imposed restrictions under the 1987 INF Treaty, blaming the West for escalating tensions. Once a Cold War milestone, the INF deal curbed the deployment of mid-range nuclear missiles. Now, with the US redeploying submarines and preparing missile stations in Europe and Asia, Moscow says the conditions that kept the treaty alive no longer exist. Amid nuclear posturing and diplomatic threats, a new era of arms competition is quietly but rapidly taking shape. TIL Creatives Representative AI Image Russia has now officially abandoned its last pretence of observing the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. In a statement released on Monday, the Foreign Ministry made it clear: Moscow "no longer considers itself bound" by its "previously adopted self restrictions" under the treaty. It cited the deployment of US intermediate-range weapons in Europe and the Asia-Pacific as a direct threat to Russian treaty, signed in 1987 by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, was supposed to end one of the most dangerous chapters of the Cold War. It banned ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 kilometres. Over 2,600 missiles were dismantled. At the time, it was hailed as a major arms control optimism didn't last. The US formally withdrew from the INF in 2019 under President Donald Trump, who argued that Russia had been breaking the rules for years by developing and deploying the 9M729 missile system (known to NATO as the SSC-8). Moscow denied the claim, but the accusations dated back to at least 2014, during Barack Obama's the US withdrawal, Russia kept its own moratorium, on paper. In practice, its actions in Ukraine suggested November, Russia reportedly used an Oreshnik missile, a weapon with a range that breaches the now-defunct treaty, against a Ukrainian city. That missile, which President Vladimir Putin has confirmed is now in service, is capable of carrying nuclear warheads and is already being deployed to Belarus. A troubling development, considering Belarus borders three NATO members. Russia's decision to end its observance of the treaty comes just days after former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev issued a nuclear threat online. In response, Trump ordered two US nuclear submarines to be 'positioned in the appropriate regions.' He later told Newsmax, 'When you talk about nuclear, we have to be prepared… and we're totally prepared.'Trump added, 'Words are very important, and can often lead to unintended consequences. I hope this will not be one of those instances.'Medvedev, who now serves as deputy chair of Russia's Security Council, hasn't been subtle. He posted on X, 'This is a new reality all our opponents will have to reckon with. Expect further steps.'His claim: NATO's "anti-Russian policy" has triggered the end of the missile moratorium. It's a familiar message from Moscow, one that frames every escalation as a defensive nuclear rhetoric has become a regular feature in Russia's propaganda arsenal. It's part sabre-rattling, part information a bigger context to all this. The United States plans to begin 'episodic deployments' of intermediate-range missiles to Germany from 2026. Typhon missile launchers have already appeared in the Philippines. US weapons testing during Australia's Talisman Sabre military exercise also raised Moscow's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, speaking to RIA Novosti last December, said the unilateral moratorium was 'practically no longer viable.' He blamed the US for ignoring joint warnings from Moscow and Beijing.'The United States arrogantly ignored warnings from Russia and China and, in practice, moved on to deploying weapons of this class in various regions of the world.'Putin himself has warned that the collapse of the INF Treaty would 'significantly erode the global security framework.'The Kremlin, however, played down Trump's submarine comments. Dmitry Peskov, Putin's spokesman, told reporters:'In this case, it is obvious that American submarines are already on combat duty. This is an ongoing process… of course, we believe that everyone should be very, very careful with nuclear rhetoric.'Tensions between Moscow and Washington are running high. Trump has issued an ultimatum: Putin must agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine by August 9 or face sweeping new sanctions, including penalties against oil buyers like India and China. Meanwhile, Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, is expected in Moscow this Putin doesn't look ready to fold. Last week, he claimed that while peace talks had shown 'some positive progress,' Russia has the 'momentum' in the war. That doesn't sound like a man ready to pull this really means is that the arms control era that started in the 1980s is over. Dead, buried, and now being actively INF Treaty wasn't perfect. It didn't cover sea- or air-launched weapons. It didn't include China. And enforcement was always shaky. But it worked as a firebreak. Without it, there are fewer guardrails. More room for miscalculation. And a growing temptation to escalate, decision to scrap its remaining commitments marks a shift from strategic ambiguity to open rearmament. The US won't be far so, nearly four decades after the Cold War began to cool, the world is once again talking about nuclear missiles in Europe. Not as history, but as breaking news.
New Indian Express
27 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Some foreign visitors will have to pay bond of up to $15,000 to enter US under new programme
NEW YORK: The Trump administration is implementing a pilot programme under which foreign visitors arriving in the US on tourist or business visas could be required to pay a 'bond' of up to USD 15,000 to ensure they don't overstay their visas. The countries that would come under the purview of the programme have not been announced yet. The US State Department has issued a 'temporary final rule' under which a 12-month long visa bond pilot programme will be started. The State Department said that under this pilot programme, foreign individuals applying for the B-1/B-2 visas to come into the US for business or tourism could be required to post a bond of up to USD 15,000. The Department said that the rule is described as a " key pillar of the Trump administration's foreign policy to protect the United States from the clear national security threat posed by visa overstays and deficient screening and vetting". "Individuals applying for visas as temporary visitors for business or pleasure (B-1/B-2) and who are nationals of countries identified by the Department as having high visa overstay rates, where screening and vetting information is deemed deficient, or offering Citizenship by Investment, if the alien obtained citizenship with no residency requirement, may be subject to the pilot programme," the department said in a public notice. It said consular officers may require covered nonimmigrant visa "applicants to post a bond of up to USD 15,000 as a condition of visa issuance, as determined by the consular officers". The pilot programme, expected to start this month, will be effective till August 5, 2026. The pilot programme appears to be part of the Trump administration's crackdown on illegal immigration, a key agenda of the US president's electoral run and his second term in the White House. The public notice states that over the years, it has been found that hundreds of thousands of nonimmigrant visitors do not depart the US timely and overstay their visas. While the public notice does not mention which countries will come under the purview of the programme, it said that the State Department will announce the covered countries within at least 15 days before the pilot programme takes effect and this list will be amended as required. "In announcing the covered countries, the Department will also provide a brief explanation of the basis for requiring bonds consistent with this rule," it said. "The pilot programme is further designed to serve as a diplomatic tool to encourage foreign governments to take all appropriate actions to ensure robust screening and vetting for all citizens in matters of identity verification and public safety and to encourage specified countries with visa overstays to ensure their nationals timely depart the United States after making temporary visits." "The public notice said that by its design and intention, the pilot programme is a tool of diplomacy, intended to encourage foreign governments to take immediate action to reduce the overstay rates of their nationals when travelling to the United States for temporary visits". The notice also cites estimates by the Department of Homeland Security, which said that in the DHS FY 2023 Overstay Report, data indicated there were over 500,000 suspected in-country overstays, - individuals who remained in the country past the end of their authorised stay and had yet to depart the country - among nonimmigrants admitted through air or sea ports of entry. Through the programme, the Department seeks to send a message to all countries to take immediate action to encourage their nationals to comply with US immigration law, it said.
Indian Express
27 minutes ago
- Indian Express
What will it take to restore J&K statehood
Six years after the Centre's unprecedented decision to reorganise the erstwhile state of Jammu & Kashmir into two Union Territories — J&K and Ladakh — calls to restore statehood have been getting louder. Last month, J&K Chief Minister Omar Abdullah made a forceful plea to the Centre for restoring statehood. 'We're not asking for something that is not our due. Statehood is the right, it was promised to the people,' he had said on July 20. What would restoration of statehood mean for J&K? What would it take for that to happen? Statehood will empower CM The J&K Reorganisation Act was passed in Parliament on August 6, 2019. It gave the Centre, through the Lieutenant Governor, a heightened legislative role in J&K, and put the bureaucratic apparatus in the UT under the Union Home Minister. Both policing and public order were placed within control of the Centre. Subjects on the Concurrent List in the Constitution were taken off the plate of the legislative Assembly as well. The Act also barred the UT's legislature from introducing bills with any fiscal, monetary or taxation implications without the recommendation of the L-G. This is particularly limiting since virtually every policy decision requires taxation, expenditure or revenue adjustments. So a restoration of statehood would effectively empower the elected government in J&K and vastly reduce the powers of the L-G, who, according to Section 53 of the Reorganisation Act, has the 'final' say on almost every administrative and legislative decision. '…The decision of the Lieutenant Governor in his discretion shall be final, and the validity of anything done by the Lieutenant Governor shall not be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in his discretion…,' Section 53 states. Act of Parliament will be needed The J&K Reorganisation was without precedent — no state had ever been reduced to a UT before. But granting statehood would not be without precedent. Five UTs have previously been granted statehood by Parliament: Himachal Pradesh in 1971, Manipur and Tripura in 1972, and Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram in 1987. Additionally, the state of Goa was carved out of the then UT of Goa, Daman and Diu in 1987. For statehood to be restored to J&K, the Reorganisation Act would have to be repealed, and the Centre would have to introduce a fresh bill in Parliament, which then would have to be passed in both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. Article 3 of the Constitution empowers Parliament to form a new state out of the territory of any other state or UT, as well as to change the area or name of a state. But a bill to this effect can only be introduced on the recommendation of the President. Since the President acts only on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers — led by the Prime Minister — this essentially means that it is up to the Centre to recommend the introduction of the bill for restoration of statehood.
