Feeds

Sabre-rattling Europe threatens US diplomats with visas

Be nice to our huddled masses, or else

High performance access to file storage

The European Commission has threatened action against US diplomats and service personnel if there's no movement from the United States on visa-free travel this year. Citizens of 12 EU member states currently require visas when travelling to the US, and according to the Commission no tangible progress has been made in talks to change this, "despite all efforts of the Commission and individual member states."

Which is a puzzle - because two sentences later the Commission tells us that the USA "committed at the June 2008 EU-USA Summit to include additional EU member states into its Visa Waiver Program (VWP) this year."

So, ah, the Commission thinks the US was lying, that it isn't going to do that anyway, so there's been "no tangible progress"? Up to a point. Certainly, it says that if there isn't any, it "will propose retaliatory measures - e.g. temporary restoration of the visa requirement for USA nationals holding diplomatic and service/official passports - as from 1 January 2009."

The situation is however more complex than the Commission's brief statement implies. The US is currently planning the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA, nee ETA) as an enhancement/abolition (depends on how you look at it) of the current Visa Waiver Program (VWP). ESTA is effectively a 'clear to fly' system that will require travellers to submit personal details prior to boarding the plane. The EU, meanwhile, has plans to introduce a similar system of its own, so at some point in the future the two should be happily swapping personal data with each other.

But prior to ESTA the US isn't massively keen on just ticking boxes to let the EU states that don't qualify for the VWP in. But it is keen on striking individual deals with these states to sign up for ESTA. Such deals have been signed with the Czech Republic, Bulgaria and Hungary so far, but Brussels objects to them, first because the US should negotiate with the EU as a whole on the issue, and second because the deals may undermine EU privacy rules, which is their job.

ESTA itself is due to go live in January 2009, at which point it will apply to all EU member states (indeed, to all states), so in some senses the EU countries signing bilateral deals could be said to be simply signing up for it ahead of the rest of the EU - not, of course, that there seems to be any kind of choice anyway.

Which would mean, then, that by 1 January 2009 all EU citizens would qualify for the VWP, or for what the VWP did next, ESTA, right? So there'll be nothing for the Commission to retaliate about, right? In which case, given that they know this, why are they threatening to retaliate?

They speak in riddles. As we said earlier, ESTA can be viewed either as an enhancement to the VWP or as its abolition. If it's an enhancement, then the Commission is going to want to agree the conditions and to ensure (just like it always does, right...) that the data requirements conform to EU data protection and privacy law. And it's going to want some kind of reciprocal arrangement but there is no way the EU version of ESTA is going to be in place next year.

And if ESTA is an abolition of the VWP, it's effectively a return to visas for Europeans travelling to the US, right? In which case, as the EU will not be in a position to abolish visa-free travel for Americans travelling to Europe in the same way as the Americans are doing in the other direction (because the EU system won't be in place), the appropriate reciprocal arrangement would have to be the reimposition of visas for US citizens travelling to Europe. So threatening the diplomats first is symbolic. Isn't it incredible how the US and EU keep saying how much they get along? ®

High performance access to file storage

More from The Register

next story
Android engineer: We DIDN'T copy Apple OR follow Samsung's orders
Veep testifies for Samsung during Apple patent trial
One year on: diplomatic fail as Chinese APT gangs get back to work
Mandiant says past 12 months shows Beijing won't call off its hackers
Big Content goes after Kim Dotcom
Six studios sling sueballs at dead download destination
Alphadex fires back at British Gas with overcharging allegation
Brit colo outfit says it paid for 347KVA, has been charged for 1940KVA
Jack the RIPA: Blighty cops ignore law, retain innocents' comms data
Prime minister: Nothing to see here, go about your business
Singapore decides 'three strikes' laws are too intrusive
When even a prurient island nation thinks an idea is dodgy it has problems
Banks slap Olympus with £160 MEEELLION lawsuit
Scandal hit camera maker just can't shake off its past
France bans managers from contacting workers outside business hours
«Email? Mais non ... il est plus tard que six heures du soir!»
Reprieve for Weev: Court disowns AT&T hacker's conviction
Appeals court strikes down landmark sentence
US taxman blows Win XP deadline, must now spend millions on custom support
Gov't IT likened to 'a Model T with a lot of things on top of it'
prev story

Whitepapers

Mainstay ROI - Does application security pay?
In this whitepaper learn how you and your enterprise might benefit from better software security.
Five 3D headsets to be won!
We were so impressed by the Durovis Dive headset we’ve asked the company to give some away to Reg readers.
3 Big data security analytics techniques
Applying these Big Data security analytics techniques can help you make your business safer by detecting attacks early, before significant damage is done.
The benefits of software based PBX
Why you should break free from your proprietary PBX and how to leverage your existing server hardware.
Mobile application security study
Download this report to see the alarming realities regarding the sheer number of applications vulnerable to attack, as well as the most common and easily addressable vulnerability errors.