By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Latvia’s Foreign Minister Baiba Braže has urged the EU to halt issuing visas to Russian citizens due to escalating security risks, citing a 25% increase in Schengen visas granted to Russians in 2024 compared to 2023. This call echoes a similar plea from Latvia’s Interior Minister, highlighting concerns about Russia’s ongoing threat to European security. The sharp rise in visa approvals, with over 565,000 Schengen tourist visas issued to Russians in 2024, further underscores these anxieties. Braže’s appeal emphasizes the potential security vulnerabilities posed by Russian nationals traveling within the Schengen Area.
Read the original article here
Latvia is urging the European Union to completely halt the issuance of visas to Russian citizens. This drastic measure, Latvia argues, is necessary given the ongoing war in Ukraine and Russia’s continued aggression. The rationale behind this call is multifaceted and reflects growing concerns about the effectiveness of current sanctions.
The current situation presents a paradox: the EU has imposed numerous sanctions on Russia, yet continues to grant visas, allowing Russian citizens relatively free movement within the bloc. This perceived inconsistency fuels the argument that current measures are insufficient to pressure Russia to end its hostilities. The continued flow of Russian citizens into the EU undermines the impact of economic sanctions and weakens the overall message of condemnation.
A key concern underpinning Latvia’s stance is the potential impact of Russian citizens leaving the country on Russia’s military and industrial capabilities. The departure of skilled workers and potential conscripts weakens Russia’s war effort and its economic potential, a consequence often overlooked in the broader geopolitical considerations. The argument posits that allowing Russians to escape conscription and economic hardship negates a potential source of pressure.
Moreover, there’s a growing unease about the principle of selective visa restrictions. If the EU refuses entry to citizens from oppressive regimes like Afghanistan and Iran, why should it extend more lenient policies to Russians? The argument suggests a need for consistent application of standards, ensuring that no country, regardless of its economic or geopolitical significance, is exempt from scrutiny.
The scale of ongoing EU trade with Russia, both in energy and non-energy sectors, is also a focal point of criticism. This continued economic engagement arguably undermines the effectiveness of sanctions and reinforces Russia’s confidence in its ability to withstand international pressure. This fuels the belief that more comprehensive measures are needed, including a complete cessation of all trade.
Another key point centers on the perceived lack of adequate European military preparedness. Despite the ongoing conflict, many EU nations have not significantly increased their defense spending or readiness levels, leaving them vulnerable to potential future threats. This contrasts sharply with the considerable military buildup in countries like Germany, Poland and Sweden, who have significantly increased their defense spending.
The potential for Russian citizens leaving the country to establish communities abroad, potentially replicating the influence of existing Russian diaspora groups, is also a concern. This prospect reinforces the view that restricting Russian entry into the EU is a matter of national security. The creation of Russian enclaves abroad could represent a continued soft power influence, potentially undermining attempts to isolate Russia.
The discussion extends beyond the strictly practical aspects. The suggestion that Russia uses such emigration as a tactic to remove potential dissidents from the population fuels the need for a tougher stance. The idea that deporting such individuals might aid Putin in suppressing dissent adds another layer of urgency to the argument for stricter controls.
The overall sentiment highlights a feeling that the EU response has been insufficiently robust. While some acknowledge that a total cessation of trade with Russia, or extreme measures like the seizure of all Russian assets in the EU, might cause significant economic repercussions, the need for more assertive action outweighs the potential costs, some argue. This feeling is heightened by the belief that Russia’s continued aggression and lack of real consequences have empowered it, requiring a more decisive response.
In essence, Latvia’s plea for a complete visa ban on Russians stems from a growing realization that current measures are not achieving their intended objectives. It reflects a broader concern about the need for more robust and consistent policies towards Russia, aimed at bringing an end to the conflict in Ukraine. The call is not simply about logistical concerns, but rather a matter of principle, national security, and the long-term effectiveness of sanctions as a tool for geopolitical influence.