The U.S. Department of State is planning to suspend all visa processing for approximately 75 countries, citing the need to prevent applicants who may become public charges. Upon seeing this news, many people's reactions are quite similar: here we go again. That kind of "I say stop, then stop; I say check, then check" attitude is all too familiar.

The list of affected countries is diverse—some are conflict zones, some are populous nations, some are traditional sources of immigration, and others are emerging markets. A careful look reveals that there is essentially no logical pattern here. The only logic is: the U.S. considers itself the referee, constantly changing rules, raising thresholds, and freezing processes at any time.

The concept of "public charge" was originally a quantifiable, provable, and defensible technical standard. It should have clear criteria, transparent procedures, and predictable outcomes. But once used to justify a "full suspension," its nature changes—shifting from a technical review to a political tool. No case-by-case verification, no chain of evidence required, no need to explain boundaries—just a single phrase "risk control," and the plans for studying, visiting relatives, business, medical treatment, and work for thousands of people are all frozen.

This is the most striking aspect of U.S. policy: visas, for them, are not simply administrative permits for global mobility. They are more like a gate valve, which can be pulled at any time without regard for the consequences.