Glenn Matsumura

this fall, thousands of international students will return to Stanford and other American campuses, ready to engage in the academic enterprise for which our nation is so highly respected.

Hundreds of foreign students, however, will not make it to the schools where they are eagerly awaited. Those students will be ensnared in a system of visa and immigration procedures that were implemented for all the right reasons but are not working properly.

In fact, the procedures may be indirectly responsible for a precipitous drop in applications this year from international graduate students to U.S. universities. Ninety percent of institutions reporting to the Council of Graduate Schools saw an average decline of 32 percent compared to 2003. The decline at Stanford was considerably less, although we suffered a significant reduction in Asian applicants.

The goal of the immigration procedures is to improve the safety of our country. Following September 11, our nation needs to do everything possible to ensure that our borders are secure. Unfortunately, the system we are using to achieve that outcome is having unintended consequences that undermine other important national goals. I believe we can keep safe borders a priority while improving the visa system to better serve national security.

According to John Pearson, director of our Bechtel International Center, up to 10 Stanford scholars are dealing with visa delays at any given moment, and that has been the case ever since stricter visa procedures were implemented after September 11. Numerous Stanford students have waited five months to two years; some have yet to receive visas.

Siming Liu is a postdoctoral fellow who studies black holes and solar physics at Stanford. In May, he went to China for a course on solar plasma processes at the Chinese National Astronomical Observatories. When he submitted his visa application at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing to return, he got caught in what has become a common dilemma.

“My interview lasted for less than a minute,” Liu wrote to the Stanford Report. “The officer only read a letter from my department stating briefly my current position and research projects and reached his decision. He seemed reluctant to understand the detail of my position and research projects and did not think about the consequence of his decision too much.”

Without even looking at Mr. Liu’s resume, the consular official determined that his work had national security implications. Mr. Liu was relatively fortunate: two weeks after his plight was publicized, he was granted a visa.

Some of the most severe problems occur for students from China, a nation that is not even on the State Department list of countries that sponsor terrorism. Another student, Deyi Hou, waited five months to get his visa to return to Stanford. The delay slowed his work and doctoral studies. “My supervisor had to admit some other students to do the project, and I had to change my project after I came back,” Hou wrote to Stanford Report.

Last spring, the presidents of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Association of Universities and leaders of more than 20 national research and academic groups urged changes in U.S. visa policies.

One key recommendation was to extend security clearances to international students and scholars from one year to the duration of their study or appointment. The groups suggested establishing a more responsive system for revalidation, allowing those leaving the United States for conferences or visits to begin the re-entry process before departure. The consortium also recommended that consular staff receive updated training and clearer protocols for visa reviews.

“There is increasing evidence,” the statement read, “that visa-related problems are discouraging and preventing the best and the brightest international students, scholars and scientists from studying and working in the United States, as well as attending academic and scientific conferences here and abroad. If action is not taken soon to improve the visa system, the misperception that the United States does not welcome international students, scholars and scientists will grow, and they may not make our nation their destination of choice now and in the future.”

The statement continued: “We are committed to working with the federal government to construct a visa system that protects the nation from terrorists while enhancing our nation’s security not only by barring inappropriate visitors but also by enabling the brightest and most qualified international students, scholars and scientists to participate fully in the U.S. higher education and research enterprises.”

These are sensible recommendations that soberly approach issues of national security and economic vitality. At the same time, they foster the intellectual exchange vital to a system of higher education that is one of this country’s most precious exports.

As the 9/11 Commission asserted, “Our border screening should check people efficiently and welcome friends. Admitting large numbers of students, scholars, businesspeople and tourists fuels our economy, cultural diversity and political reach.”

RETURN TO TOP