Friday, March 7, 2025



The new visa regime

A chihuahua barks at the Rottweilers


If a subject is discussed as controversially as the new visa regime, then one has to ask “who would benefit and who would suffer”?

The narrative about visa policies is highly charged with emotions, like dignity, racism and discrimination (against Africans). Firstly the visa regulations of the named 33 countries are not limited to Africans. If a french tourist wants to visit the USA he has to apply for a visa at an American consulate. So you can drop the race card. Secondly, the discrimination is an intended feature of the visa politics. In the USA they would refer to “national security” concerns. Thirdly, the dignity argument is just whining to draw some sympathy for the poor victims. Or does any Namibian feel undignified when they must supply “certified copies” at every contact with the authorities? Or do they feel degraded when they must copy their IDs when they buy a bed at a furniture shop? For instance in Germany no police station will certify anything, because no office is demanding that. But let’s leave the emotional decorum behind and turn to the reasons behind the new visa regime.

So, who could benefit from it? Certainly not the 99% of ordinary Namibians that can not travel to Europe or Northern America. Also not the Namibian diplomats who have privileged passports. It is only the super-rich 1% of the population that indulge in a cosmopolitan lifestyle. They get red-hot envious when they hear that e.g. Germans can travel to 191 countries without a visa. Therefore a tiny group of influential people are behind this new visa regime. They wanted revenge for their hurt feelings. But what does it say about a democratic government that can be hold hostage by a small selfish group? Who is wagging whom, the dog the tail or the tail the dog– the government or the oligarchy?

These people are exceptionally privileged in their home country. They developed a feudalistic mindset: in Namibia we are nobility and can do whatever we like. When they travel abroad they lose the status and ‘respect’ they are used to, and they throw a tantrum.
That is where the “Dom Trots” starts.

Then let’s see who is on the suffering end of the new visa regime. Naturally the tourism industry. If from the 1,054,181 foreign arrivals (2023 statistics) only a few percent decide to travel elsewhere thousands of workers in the industry will lose their jobs and maybe some businesses will go broke. So, the ordinary people will pay the price for the desired comfort of the super-rich.

Then the tourists themselves. To add insult to injury the requirements for the visa-on-arrival are simply ridiculous. They amount to harassment. I have never heard that anyone has to show six moths’ bank statements anywhere! The government argues they must know if the visitors can pay their bills. That is MBE (male bovine excrement). 
Any decent tourist from Europe plans a trip in advance, including financially. Does the government have numbers of tourists that didn’t pay their bills? And how big was the presumed loss?
Let us compare some income figures. In Namibia the minimum wage is 18 N$/h, in e.g. Germany it is 12.82 €/h (246 NAD). In Namibia 2.6% of the population make more than NAD 40,000 (2084 €) per month. That is what a cleaner or any minimum wage earner can make per month. It is not this income group that visits Namibia, but the better off and pensioners with enough available money. They want to spent their money in Namibia, but the Namibian government doesn’t trust them, implicating they want to rip off Namibian businesses. I would not be surprised if this assumption of criminal intent scares off some tourists.
From this angle of perception the “reciprocity” demand looks unwarranted and more like a stupid idea. I guess Namibia is shooting herself in the foot. 
How many of the 33 sanctioned countries have changed their visa requirements for Namibians? Great results of a bold action!! (irony off).


References:
10. October 2024