In March 2024, a personal tragedy highlighted a brutal reality: the unequal access to global mobility dictated by passport strength. When the author’s aunt died unexpectedly, the need to travel quickly was met with a harsh bureaucratic wall – her Indian passport held hostage by an Irish visa application. This incident isn’t isolated; it’s a symptom of a deeply flawed system where travel freedom is determined not by need, but by nationality.
The Hierarchy of Passports
The concept of “passport privilege” describes the stark disparity in travel ease based on a traveler’s citizenship. Annual rankings, like the Henley Passport Index, reveal this imbalance: Singapore currently leads with visa-free access to 193 nations, while the Indian passport grants access to only 57. This isn’t merely inconvenient; it’s a form of systemic exclusion built into the very fabric of international travel.
The historical roots of this disparity are deliberate. The first modern passport regulations emerged in France in 1792 not to facilitate travel, but to control it. Historian Andreas Fahrmeir notes that these regulations were designed to suppress dissent, prevent infiltration, and curb crime. Passports were always a tool for selective access, favoring the wealthy, powerful, and historically, often white populations.
The Evolution of Control
World War One cemented the modern passport as a standard for international movement. Early British passports meticulously cataloged physical attributes (“shape of face,” “complexion”), reinforcing the idea of state-sanctioned identification and control. While air travel democratized movement in the mid-20th century, the underlying system remained unequal.
The current system disproportionately burdens travelers from emerging economies. The United Nations’ Tourism Visa Openness Report (2023) shows that these nations face significantly higher visa hurdles. While advanced economies prioritize tourism openness, they maintain strict requirements for applicants from the Global South: employment letters, bank statements, booked accommodations, and prolonged processing times.
The Humiliation of Application
The visa application process itself is often degrading. Applicants from weaker passport nations endure invasive interviews, repeated questioning, and arbitrary rejections. African applicants, for example, face an 11% higher rejection rate for Schengen visas. Even successful applicants must navigate bureaucratic delays, with embassies sometimes holding passports for weeks.
This system isn’t accidental. It reflects a deeper pattern of economic and colonial exploitation. Historian William Dalrymple points out that in 1600, India generated 22.5% of global GDP while Britain produced only 1.8%. By the height of British rule, those figures were reversed, illustrating a systematic transfer of wealth that continues to shape global inequality.
The Cost of Freedom
For many in the Global South, travel is a luxury reserved for the privileged few. The average annual income in India is approximately $7,300, while a round-trip flight to New York costs $800 – over a tenth of that income. The system actively limits spontaneity, escapism, and the simple right to explore the world.
The author’s own experience, waiting eight days to retrieve their passport from the Irish embassy for a separate trip, underscores the absurdity of this system. The weight of the visa application itself – 18 ounces – is a physical manifestation of the bureaucratic burden placed on those with weaker passports.
The reality is that “passportism,” as coined by academic Srđan Mladenov Jovanović, isn’t about travel; it’s about power. It reinforces a world where freedom of movement remains a privilege, not a right.
The system shows no signs of changing. It functions too efficiently for the nations that benefit from it – the same nations that drew the borders of those they once occupied. Until systemic change occurs, travel will remain deeply political, and for millions, a distant dream.
