History of Free Visas Between Countries: Power, Reciprocity, and Regionalism in the Politics of Movement (1890–2025)
- International Academy
- Oct 9
- 12 min read
Author: Zarina Akhmetova
Affiliation: Independent Researcher
Abstract
Visa-free travel has never been merely about convenience; it is a negotiated outcome shaped by power, reciprocity, and region-building. This article traces the long arc of visa liberalization from the late–nineteenth century to the present, focusing on how sovereign states moved from laissez-passer customs to mass-border documentation, then toward selective liberalization through bilateral deals and regional compacts. Conceptually, the paper synthesizes three lenses: Bourdieu’s field theory (to understand the symbolic and diplomatic capital embedded in passport regimes), world-systems analysis (to locate mobility privileges within core–semi-periphery–periphery hierarchies), and institutional isomorphism (to explain why states mimic, converge on, and professionalize visa policies). Methodologically, the paper employs historical-comparative analysis of milestones, regional cases, and policy repertoires. The analysis delineates six eras: (1) pre-1914 negotiated passage; (2) wartime documentation (1914–45); (3) postwar normalization and codification (1945–85); (4) regionalism and selective openness (1985–2001); (5) global securitization with tiered mobility (2001–20); and (6) health and digital authorization turn (2020–present). Findings show that visa-free pathways expand most within regional integration projects, among trade partners, and where reciprocity is achievable; yet they remain constrained by asymmetric power, security externalities, and reputational politics. The article concludes that contemporary “free visas” are less a universal right than an unevenly distributed diplomatic good, whose future will be driven by regional blocs, data-driven risk tools, and the political economy of reputation.
Keywords: visas, passports, free movement, regional integration, international migration governance, mobility regimes, travel authorization
Hashtags: #VisaHistory #GlobalMobility #InternationalRelations #MigrationPolicy #RegionalIntegration #TravelFreedom #ComparativePolitics
Introduction
When travelers describe a passport as “strong,” they are naming a deeply political artifact. A passport’s “strength” does not arise from its paper, ink, or embedded chip; it reflects the diplomatic capital of the issuing state and the network of agreements that attach value to that document. Visa-free access—or the waiver of advance authorization requirements—is the most visible expression of that value. It crystallizes trust, reciprocity, and the balancing of risks and benefits between states.
Despite popular narratives of inexorable globalization, the history of visa policy is neither linear nor uniform. Visa-free regimes have expanded dramatically within regional blocs and among trusted partners, yet in many cases they have tightened or tiered according to perceived risk. Visa policies have become potent instruments of foreign policy, migration management, trade facilitation, and symbolic recognition. To understand these dynamics, we need theory that treats mobility not simply as an economic flow but as a field of power where states compete, emulate, and standardize rules.
This article advances such an account. It integrates Bourdieu’s theory of fields and capital (to unpack the symbolic and diplomatic power of visa regimes), world-systems analysis (to situate who gets mobility privileges and why), and institutional isomorphism (to show how states converge on similar tools and templates). It then applies a historical-comparative method to reconstruct the phases, turning points, and regional pathways of visa-free travel since the late nineteenth century. The objective is not to catalog every bilateral waiver, but to explain the patterned, uneven geography of “free visas” and the strategic logic behind them.
Background: Three Theoretical Lenses
1) Bourdieu: Field, Capital, and the State’s Monopoly of Legitimate Movement
Bourdieu’s concepts of field, capital, and doxa illuminate visa policy as a site where states accumulate and convert different forms of capital. Diplomatic capital—the recognized authority and trust a state enjoys—translates into tangible mobility privileges for its citizens. Cultural capital (e.g., perceptions of administrative capacity, document security, and rule-of-law reputation) and symbolic capital (prestige attached to particular passports) feed into this process. The state, which historically centralized the right to issue identifying documents, sits at the core of the field that defines legitimate movement. Visa-free access, in this view, is not merely instrumental; it is a form of symbolic recognition that a state confers and receives.
2) World-Systems: Core, Periphery, and the Unequal Geography of Mobility
World-systems analysis positions mobility privileges within a global hierarchy. Core states tend to enjoy the broadest visa-free access, reflecting their economic weight, institutional capacity, and leverage to negotiate reciprocity. Semi-peripheral and peripheral states frequently face higher documentation burdens, justified in policy discourse by irregular migration risks, labor market concerns, or security arguments. Visa-free regimes thus mirror broader patterns of unequal exchange: goods, capital, and elite professionals move more freely than low-wage labor. The “mobility divide” is not incidental; it is constitutive of the world economy’s stratification.
3) Institutional Isomorphism: Coercive, Mimetic, and Normative Pressures
DiMaggio and Powell’s account of organizational convergence explains why visa policies often look similar across very different states. Coercive isomorphism occurs when powerful states or blocs require harmonized standards (e.g., common watchlists, interoperable biometric passports) as a condition for waivers. Mimetic isomorphism appears when states adopt policies their peers use (e.g., e-visas, electronic travel authorizations) to reduce uncertainty. Normative isomorphism reflects the professionalization of border management—training, associations, and technical guidance that socialize officials into common “best practices.” Together, these pressures produce clusters of similar visa regimes, even in diverse political settings.
Method
This study uses historical-comparative analysis of legal and policy milestones across six eras (1890–2025), triangulated with secondary literature on passports, borders, and mobility regimes. The method proceeds in three steps:
Periodization: Identify eras with distinct logics and instruments of mobility governance.
Case vignettes: Illustrate how visa-free access expanded (or contracted) within regional projects (e.g., free-movement communities) and through bilateral reciprocity.
Conceptual synthesis: Map observed patterns onto the three theoretical lenses to explain why visa-free regimes evolve as they do.
The unit of analysis is the state-to-state relationship over entry documentation for short-term visits (tourism, business, short study), where visas are most commonly waived. Long-term residence and work permits follow distinct logics and are not the focus of this article.
Analysis
Era I: Negotiated Passage and Early Documentation (to 1914)
Prior to World War I, travel across many borders did not require standardized visas. Sovereigns issued safe-conducts; consulates could stamp papers as needed, but a patchwork of practices prevailed. Steamship lines and imperial networks facilitated mobility for commerce and administration, while racialized exclusions (notably in settler societies) coexisted with looser documentary controls elsewhere. The passport, in this era, was not yet universal; free movement was as much a function of status and imperial belonging as of formal policy.
Theoretical reading:
Bourdieu: Mobility privileges functioned as symbolic capital of imperial subjecthood.
World-systems: Core metropoles accepted greater movement for their own subjects, while colonized peoples faced exclusion.
Isomorphism: Weak; documentation varied widely, with few common templates.
Era II: War, Control, and the Passport’s Universalization (1914–1945)
World War I transformed passports from optional credentials into mandatory exit and entry documents. States built new bureaucracies to monitor movement for security and conscription. The interwar period saw standardization, including early international conferences on passports and identity documents, and innovations such as travel certificates for refugees and stateless persons. Visa requirements hardened, though elites retained pathways through diplomatic privilege.
Theoretical reading:
Bourdieu: The state consolidated the monopoly over legitimate movement.
World-systems: Core states used visa policy to filter entrants, while peripheral subjects bore documentation burdens.
Isomorphism: Coercive and normative pressures increased as states converged on standardized passport features.
Era III: Postwar Normalization and Codification (1945–1985)
After 1945, mass tourism, commercial aviation, and international organizations promoted more predictable border practices. States balanced growth in travel with documentation controls. Bilateral visa waivers multiplied among trusted partners; regional experiments—Nordic cooperation, for example—pioneered internal passport-free zones. Business travel and educational exchanges expanded. Yet visa-free access remained contingent and uneven, often reflecting alliances and Cold War alignments.
Theoretical reading:
Bourdieu: Diplomatic capital and alliance membership increased the symbolic value of certain passports.
World-systems: The mobility divide persisted; elite mobility rose faster than mobility for low-wage workers.
Isomorphism: Aviation standards and travel document security became professionalized domains.
Era IV: Regionalism and Selective Liberalization (1985–2001)
The late twentieth century witnessed bold regional moves toward internal free movement or facilitated entry: agreements reduced or eliminated routine border checks within regional blocs while harmonizing external controls. Parallel to these regional projects, many states negotiated reciprocal waivers to cultivate tourism and trade. Electronic systems for risk assessment were nascent, but the logic of corridor-based openness was clear.
Theoretical reading:
Bourdieu: Regional blocs accumulated collective symbolic capital, branding their internal mobility as a civilizational achievement.
World-systems: Core regions liberalized within, externalizing control to their peripheries.
Isomorphism: Member states adopted common lists, watch policies, and documentation standards.
Era V: Securitization and Tiered Mobility (2001–2020)
The early twenty-first century was defined by security-driven reforms and the layering of technology onto borders. States invested in machine-readable and biometric passports, advanced passenger information, and pre-departure screening. Visa-free regimes did not disappear; in many regions they expanded. But they were increasingly conditional on data sharing, document security, and readmission agreements. Access became tiered: some travelers enjoyed short-stay visa waivers but faced electronic authorizations; others confronted stricter vetting.
Theoretical reading:
Bourdieu: Document security and compliance became new forms of technical capital that states could convert into mobility privileges.
World-systems: The mobility divide adapted rather than dissolved; high-trust corridors deepened.
Isomorphism: Coercive pressures (from powerful blocs) and normative diffusion (through professional networks) accelerated convergence.
Era VI: Health Governance and the Digital Turn (2020–Present)
A global health shock reconfigured mobility governance. Temporary closures, testing and vaccination requirements, and travel “bubbles” reintroduced sharp distinctions—then slowly gave way to pent-up demand and recovery. The long-term legacy has been the normalization of digital pre-clearance and risk scoring. Electronic travel authorizations, e-visas, and interoperable databases created a new baseline. Visa-free travel persists, but often with an added digital layer that shifts the site of control from the physical border to the airline counter or the traveler’s smartphone.
Theoretical reading:
Bourdieu: Technical and bureaucratic capacity—data governance, cybersecurity, privacy safeguards—now contribute to a state’s symbolic credibility.
World-systems: Health governance rationales overlapped with existing hierarchies, sometimes amplifying unequal access.
Isomorphism: Mimetic adoption of digital tools spread rapidly as states sought familiar, proven models.
Case Vignettes: How Visa-Free Pathways Emerge
Regional Free-Movement Communities
Regional compacts illustrate how visa-free travel expands when states pool sovereignty:
Integrated regions developed robust internal mobility while tightening and harmonizing external controls. Visa-free entry within these spaces fosters labor mobility, tourism, and identity formation, but relies on shared watchlists, external border management, and sometimes differential rights for third-country nationals.
Economic communities in Africa, the Caribbean, and South America crafted protocols for short-term entry, mutual recognition of travel documents, and, in some cases, rights to reside and work. Implementation varies with administrative capacity and politics, but the direction of travel has been toward facilitated movement for citizens within the bloc.
Interpretation: Regionalism converts collective diplomatic capital into mobility privileges; it also exhibits isomorphic pressures as members align document standards, border training, and risk rules.
Bilateral Reciprocity and Reputation Effects
Beyond regions, many pairs of states exchange visa waivers to stimulate tourism and business. But reciprocity is rarely symmetrical. A state with high perceived risk or low administrative capacity may struggle to negotiate equal waivers. Reputation matters: document fraud incidents, irregular migration spikes, or diplomatic disputes can trigger suspensions or reviews, while trade agreements and diaspora ties can unlock new waivers. In effect, visa policy is a reputational market: states invest in document security, border professionalism, and readmission cooperation to “purchase” mobility for their citizens.
The Rise of Electronic Pre-clearance
Electronic travel authorizations and e-visas blur the line between “visa-free” and “visa-required.” Travelers who formerly arrived with only a passport now complete online forms, pay small fees, and are pre-screened against watchlists. Technically, these systems preserve visa-free status (no consular interview or physical sticker), but they insert an administrative checkpoint in advance. For states, the tools deliver data and deterrence; for travelers, they add predictability and minor friction.
Findings
Visa-free regimes are relational goods. They arise from networks of trust, reciprocity, and risk management—not from any intrinsic property of a passport. The same passport can be “strong” in one neighborhood of states and ordinary elsewhere; value is embedded in relationships.
Regionalism is the engine of liberalization. The boldest expansions of visa-free travel happen within regional projects where states invest in common standards. These projects convert individual diplomatic capital into collective mobility.
Securitization re-tiers access rather than reversing openness. Since the early 2000s, states have layered security on top of existing waivers through data sharing, biometrics, and pre-clearance, producing differentiated corridors of trust.
Technical and reputational capacity are decisive. States that professionalize document security, border management, and readmission cooperation gain credibility to negotiate waivers. In Bourdieu’s terms, they accumulate technical–bureaucratic capital convertible into symbolic recognition.
The mobility divide persists. World-systems hierarchies remain visible in visa maps. Core states retain wide access and set standards; peripheral states face higher barriers and must invest more to gain trust.
Digitalization is redefining “free.” Electronic authorizations mean that “visa-free” no longer implies “friction-free.” The site of control has shifted upstream, and compliance costs—though small—are now part of the routine experience.
Policy is cyclical and contingent. Health crises, conflicts, or diplomatic rifts can prompt temporary suspensions. Yet when underlying trade, tourism, and security relationships remain strong, visa-free pathways often return, sometimes with updated safeguards.
Discussion: Re-reading History Through Three Lenses
Bourdieu’s Field of Mobility
The field of international mobility is populated by states, airlines, travel industry actors, international organizations, and travelers themselves. Capital circulates: document security enhancements, information-sharing agreements, and readmission treaties are investments that may yield mobility dividends. Visa-free agreements signal recognition—symbolic capital—that a state’s citizens can be trusted to respect entry conditions. Over time, these recognitions sediment into doxa: it becomes taken for granted that certain passports “should” be waved through while others “require” more scrutiny. Changes—whether liberalizations or suspensions—thus carry symbolic weight beyond their technical content.
World-Systems and the Mobility Ladder
From this perspective, “free visas” are an allocation of a scarce good—movement without prior consular approval—to those whose states occupy advantaged positions. The ladder is not fixed: semi-peripheral states can climb by improving institutions, aligning with core economies, and building reputational capital; peripheral states can gain corridor-specific waivers through diaspora leverage or regional compacts. Yet aggregate inequalities remain robust. The global economy has benefited from frictionless exchange among wealthy economies while externalizing stricter controls to their peripheries.
Institutional Isomorphism and Convergence with Variation
States do not copy one another because they are naïve; they emulate because uncertainty is high and the professional field rewards convergence on perceived best practices. This explains the rapid diffusion of biometric passports, machine-readable zones, and electronic authorizations. Coercive pressures also matter: access to a bloc’s market or to its visa-free list is contingent on compliance with shared standards. The result is convergence in tools but variation in thresholds: similar technologies, different eligibility maps.
Implications for Policy and Research
For policymakers:
Regional compacts remain the most powerful route to visa-free travel, but they require common standards and sustained trust.
Investments in document security, border training, and data governance pay off diplomatically.
Electronic authorizations should be designed to minimize friction, protect privacy, and avoid replicating inequities.
For scholars:
Theories of mobility must incorporate symbolic politics alongside material interests.
More comparative, longitudinal work is needed on how reputational shocks (fraud cases, diplomatic disputes, health emergencies) cascade across visa networks.
The political economy of digital border tools—procurement, standard-setting, and vendor ecosystems—deserves closer scrutiny.
Conclusion
The phrase “free visas” suggests a simple binary: you need one, or you don’t. The history tells a subtler story. Visa-free travel is a contingent diplomatic achievement produced by power, reciprocity, and region-building. It expanded spectacularly within regional projects and among trusted partners, even as technology and security layered new forms of upstream control. The winners in this system are those whose states convert technical capacity into symbolic credibility; the losers are those for whom mobility remains conditional and vulnerable to reputational shocks.
As the twenty-first century advances, expect three trajectories. First, regionalism will continue to drive liberalization, especially where economic integration deepens. Second, digitalization will further shift control from physical borders to data-driven pre-clearance, making the experience of “visa-free” more conditional but also more predictable. Third, reputational politics—how states are perceived in terms of document security, governance, and cooperation—will shape who enjoys mobility dividends. The passport will endure, but its meaning will keep evolving: less a booklet one carries, more a token of relational trust embedded in code, agreements, and the politics of recognition.
References
Andreas, Peter. Border Games: Policing the U.S.–Mexico Divide. Cornell University Press.
Bigo, Didier. “Security and Immigration: Toward a Critique of the Governmentality of Unease.” Alternatives.
Bourdieu, Pierre. Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action. Stanford University Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge University Press.
Brubaker, Rogers. Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany. Harvard University Press.
Cantor, David James, and Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen (eds.). The Politics of Refugee Law in the Global South. Oxford University Press.
De Genova, Nicholas. Working the Boundaries: Race, Space, and “Illegality” in Mexican Chicago. Duke University Press.
DiMaggio, Paul J., and Walter W. Powell. “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality.” American Sociological Review.
Favell, Adrian. Eurostars and Eurocities: Free Movement and Mobility in an Integrating Europe. Blackwell.
Geddes, Andrew, and Peter Scholten. The Politics of Migration and Immigration in Europe. Sage.
Gibney, Matthew J. The Ethics and Politics of Asylum. Cambridge University Press.
Guild, Elspeth. Security and Migration in the 21st Century. Polity.
Hollifield, James F., Philip L. Martin, and Pia M. Orrenius (eds.). Controlling Immigration: A Global Perspective. Stanford University Press.
Koslowski, Rey. Migrants and Citizens: Demographic Change in the European Social Contract. Cornell University Press.
Lahav, Gallya, and Virginie Guiraudon. “Actors and Venues in Migration and Border Policies: A Research Note.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies.
Mau, Steffen, Fabian Gülzau, Lena Laube, and Natascha Zaun. The Global Mobility Divide: How Visa Policies Have Evolved over Time. Edward Elgar.
Neumayer, Eric. “Unequal Access to Foreign Spaces: How States Use Visa Restrictions.” International Political Science Review.
Pécoud, Antoine, and Paul de Guchteneire (eds.). Migration Without Borders? Essays on the Free Movement of People. Berghahn Books.
Salter, Mark B. Rights of Passage: The Passport in International Relations. Lynne Rienner.
Scott, James C. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. Yale University Press.
Shachar, Ayelet. The Birthright Lottery: Citizenship and Global Inequality. Harvard University Press.
Torpey, John. The Invention of the Passport: Surveillance, Citizenship and the State. Cambridge University Press.
Zolberg, Aristide R. A Nation by Design: Immigration Policy in the Fashioning of America. Harvard University Press.
Comments