Antigua and Barbuda has formally voiced its deep concern over a new immigration bill introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by South Carolina Representative Nancy Mace. The “Third World Immigration Moratorium Act” singles out 40 nations for strict immigration restrictions, and the inclusion of Antigua and Barbuda has raised significant red flags for its government. In a strongly worded letter to Representative Mace, the nation’s Ambassador to the United States, Sir Ronald Sanders, emphasized that while every country has the sovereign right to determine its own immigration policies, legislation affecting friendly nations must be built on a foundation of verified facts rather than outdated or inaccurate assumptions.
At the heart of the dispute is a persistent, documented error regarding the country’s Citizenship by Investment (CBI) program. Ambassador Sanders pointed out that a previous U.S. Presidential Proclamation incorrectly claimed that Antigua and Barbuda offers citizenship without any residency requirements. The Antiguan government has repeatedly corrected this misapprehension, clarifying that their program has always mandated a residency component. By anchoring the new legislation on this flawed premise, the bill unfairly characterises the country’s legal processes. Furthermore, Ambassador Sanders highlighted a rather clumsy, yet significant, drafting error in the bill: it lists “Antigua” and “Barbuda” as two separate countries. This oversight is not merely a clerical mistake; to the authorities in St. John’s, it signals a deeper lack of diligence that undermines the credibility of the entire legislative proposal.
The Ambassador also objected, quite firmly, to the company in which Antigua and Barbuda has been placed. The bill categorizes the island nation alongside countries experiencing intense armed conflict, systemic economic collapse, or volatile, large-scale migration crises. Characterizing Antigua and Barbuda in these terms is a fundamental misunderstanding of the nation’s reality. It is an upper-middle-income country, recognized for maintaining one of the highest per capita incomes in the Caribbean. Far from being a source of regional instability, it is a sturdy, parliamentary democracy supported by an independent judiciary and strong, long-standing democratic institutions that enjoy the genuine confidence of both its citizens and its global partners.
The relationship between the United States and Antigua and Barbuda is, by all accounts, deep-rooted and mutually beneficial. Ambassador Sanders was quick to remind U.S. legislators that this is not a one-way street, but an active,, collaborative partnership. American citizens enjoy visa-free travel to the islands, own significant property there, and operate successful businesses, all protected by local law. The two nations work in lockstep on critical issues like regional security, law enforcement, climate-related disaster response, and trade. To paint a partner of such long standing as a security threat or an immigration liability is not only factually disconnected from reality but is also diplomatically off-base.
When it comes to actual immigration behavior, the data tells a story that contradicts the spirit of the proposed moratorium. The flow of people between the two nations has historically been orderly, lawful, and peaceful. Notably, the Ambassador pointed out that no citizen of Antigua and Barbuda has ever sought refugee status in the United States—a statistic that speaks volumes about the stability and prosperity of the island nation. Even in cases of visa overstays, the numbers are negligible, consistently resting at around just one percent. Moreover, the government has maintained a consistent record of cooperating fully with U.S. immigration authorities regarding the return of its nationals.
Ultimately, the goal of the Antiguan government is to restore a sense of accuracy to the dialogue. Ambassador Sanders has invited Representative Mace to reconsider the bill’s inclusion of Antigua and Barbuda, urging her office to ensure that any future policies affecting their country are shaped by verified, current, and objective information. By highlighting these errors, the Ambassador is not just defending his country’s reputation; he is advocating for a more mature and informed approach to international policymaking. For Antigua and Barbuda, it is a matter of being treated with the respect and rigorous consideration that a long-time friend and democratic partner deserves.