As International Student Week approaches, the role of the international student is celebrated as integral in fostering diversity on American college campuses. UB, with its 3,223 international students, is no different from any other major institution in its willingness to accept applications from abroad. Yet difficulty in attaining visas, the role of the as-yet unformed Homeland Security Department and misplaced paranoia have all contributed to hard times for the hopeful international student.
The State Department and security agencies are dragging their feet in the processing of students who have been accepted into colleges and universities. In addition, they are putting more restrictions on the students, like flagging them and denying visas if they wish to be involved in an academic program such as engineering or biology, for fear they will acquire sensitive information that would aid in the creation of weapons for their home countries. Even more unfairly, students who are flagged may not be told so until after they have paid their first semester's tuition or until the semester is underway.
Jan. 1, 2003 marks the date when international education offices in colleges and universities will be made responsible for implementing background checks on all foreign applicants. When President George W. Bush announced his desire to create the Homeland Security Department, it was ostensibly to attend to duties such as these. Instead, though, the State Department, Department of Defense, INS, FBI, CIA, and the NSA - all components of the future Homeland Security Department - have passed the buck to institutions ill-equipped for the task.
This is a case of hyper-delegation to the wrong parties. There is nothing wrong with being cautious about who is allowed to enter the country; studying in the United States is a privilege, not a right, and we must ensure that our own citizens are not put at risk unnecessarily. It is pragmatic to make sure, to the best available knowledge, that a student let into the country is not a danger to security. This responsibility lies solely in the federal government, not a college admissions office; it seems impossible that the staff in such offices are qualified to provide such a level of security.
As far as international students being singled out, it warrants emphasis that only one in 50 visas are academic visas. If they are to be given extensive background checks, then the same treatment should be given to those seeking tourist visas. Comparatively, students pose no statistically greater threat to national security than do holders of other visas.
If the government continues to insist, however, that students be held to a higher standard, then why allow accepted students, waiting for approval in their home countries, to languish without word even after a semester begins? The government is flatly wrong to raise a standard while maintaining the same timeframe or procedure for the old standard. If more thorough background checks are necessary, the concerned parties must start the application and visa process earlier; otherwise, a disservice is perpetrated against the school and the student.
A foreign student's education in the United States is not a guaranteed right, but it is fundamentally wrong to have a double standard for reasons of paranoia and unsubstantiated suspicion. For the government - and, in particular, the executive branch - to place the burden of screenings on untrained personnel is irresponsible and grossly inadequate for the purpose intended. The Homeland Security Department or the agencies which will be combined under that name must take this burden from academia or risk missing the truly important challenges facing American security and freedom.
