Lopping the Head to Spite the Face

US policy on international students began evolving since the World Trade Center bombing in 1993. However, September 11 attacks in 2001 resulted in a marked increase and more pronounced effort to evolve policy faster and further than government considered necessary or warranted in the past.

Prior to the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, and the September 11 attacks in 2001, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) was responsible for tracking and monitoring international students in the US. From 1983, INS utilized the paper based Student and Schools System (STSC) that made them aware of which international students entered the US, but was not able to effectively track or monitor them after their initial entry.

INS’s paper-based STSC deficiencies became disturbingly apparent after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. The terrorists involved were in the US as international students; however, their student status had been expired without INS knowledge. After this discovery, the US formed a multi-agency task force in 1995 to evaluate INS’s processes for tracking and monitoring international students.

In 1997, INS tested the feasibility of an electronic reporting concept by implementing the pilot project called Coordinated Interagency Partnership Regulating International Students (CIPRIS). By July 2001, following CIPRIS, INS developed a new web-based system called the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS). However, despite this move, INS continued to inadequately track and monitor international students.

Their inadequate tracking and monitoring mechanisms became evident when INS made the outrageous gaffe of sending notification to a Florida flight school that two of the terrorists received approval for their change to student status six months after their suicide attacks. Due to such gaffes, and the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, problems with the tracking and monitoring system of INS were positively identifiable.

Soon after the terrorist attacks, congressional members quickly began formulating and proposing policy to address INS inadequacies. Senator Feinstein harshly criticized the system claiming the international student status was one of the most unregulated and exploited categories, and that little scrutiny is given to international students prior to their arrival. A number of congressional members even went so far as to propose a bill that would impose a nine-month moratorium on all student visas. Such a proposal never passed, yet it indicated the serious with which members were treating this issue.

The White House, in response to the attacks, created the Homeland Security Council’s Foreign Terrorist Tracking Force. The task force reviewed student visa policies, and instituted tighter controls on student visa issuance. The task force’s principal goal was to ensure prohibition of education and training to foreign nationals wishing to use their training to harm the US and its allies.

Due to the nature of the threat and mood of the country, Congress and the White House formulated policy with national security as their main objective. Prior to terrorist attacks, international student educators had significant influence over policy formulation in this particular area. However, the terrorist attacks essentially marginalized any concern international student educators may have had, and instead Congress and the White House shifted focus to security issues exclusively.

Resulting post-September 11 policy caused a number of visa problems that continue to hinder international students and scientists. Among the problems are delays in visa issuance that the Government Accounting Office is blaming on communication lapses. The communication lapses occur among the frequent interagency security checks involving the FBI, CIA, and Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Due to such problems, schools have experienced drops in international student applications and enrollment. These drops translate into drops in revenue and academic talent for schools.

The policy impact on international students is increased anxiety, fear, and long delays. According to a survey by the American Institute of Physics (AIP), new regulations and general attitudes of suspicion in the United States towards international scientists is leading to reductions in the number of physicists entering the country.

Adding to international students’ anxiety, many experience inconveniences by being required to comply with special registration procedures. Special registration procedures require students exit specified ports where they have to participate in an exit interview. Upon reentry, the same students are required to go through an entry interview. Essentially, every exit and entry requires an interview with an immigration officer.

In response to mounting complaints from academia and scientific community, DHS worked through some of their problems and eventually relaxed their policy causing drops in university applications to begin to slow. Yet despite some recent relaxing on the part of DHS, there is a great deal more damage left to repair. If the US wants to maintain its scientific and technological edge, DHS and Department of State must work toward being more accommodating and welcoming of our international students, scholars, and scientists.