The Internet is on fire due to the ban on multiple Schengen visas for Russians. Some people think that this is what they need. Others doubt it. We have chosen the main lines

We also ask for your opinion (yes, tell us what you think)

In 2024, Russian citizens received almost 542 thousand Schengen visas, of which almost 224 thousand (41%) were multiple entries . Now Russians will not be able to obtain so-called multiple visas to the European Union - on November 7, the European Commission introduced a ban on their issuance. This decision, explained by security reasons, drew criticism from many Russians. They believe that a ban on multiple visas will not make Europe safer, but will complicate life for opponents of Vladimir Putin and Russia’s war with Ukraine - both those who left and those who stayed. In addition to the question of efficiency, the question of ethics is being discussed: is it fair to punish hundreds of thousands of Russians, not all of whom support Putin, for the war he started?

Meduza studied what public figures say about the ban on multiple visas - from representatives of the Russian government to journalists, politicians and human rights activists who were forced to leave Russia (we shortened and edited some quotes for ease of reading, but retained their meaning). We are also interested in what you, our readers, think about this ban. Do you think it's fair? Will it personally affect you and your loved ones? Do you think it will improve European security? Do you think that it will only worsen the holiday conditions for Russians in the EU or deprive them of something more? We would like to know the opinions of readers both from Russia and from other countries. The response form is at the bottom of the article. We will publish the most interesting answers.

Maria Zakharova , press secretary of the Russian Foreign Ministry

Deprive yourself of legal visitors, tourists from Russia who came with documents, with a certain financial cushion that guarantees their legal presence in the countries of the European Union. I believe that this is driving Europe to suicide.

Arthur Muradyan , vice-president of ATOR for outbound tourism

Typically, multiple visas are needed by businessmen who, due to their field of activity, need to travel frequently to EU countries. But for traveling people, the situation also complicates everything, adding costs, nerves, and the need to constantly monitor whether the consulate has issued a visa. The measure is unpleasant, but not critical.

Sergei Lagodinsky , German MEP

I don’t quite understand why foreign governments should justify themselves for deciding that ordinary tourists from a criminally militant country, who have no relatives in the EU and who are not dissidents or human rights activists, that is, ordinary, apolitical tourists, can come on holiday to the EU, requesting and receiving visas for each individual trip. That is, not like an inn, but in an orderly manner. <…> What is the problem? Why hysteria? <…> And yes, I absolutely understand the difficulties that [this measure] is fraught with. But this decision is not the scandal that many people think it is.

Anton Dolin , film critic

I'm sort of a dissident, a foreign agent, a criminal case. I went to Europe and live here with my family. <…> My children have a grandmother. She is a simple Moscow pensioner. She has not lived with them for four years and sees them about a couple of times a year. Every time we freeze, we apply for a visa for her, and it takes many months to get it, then they give it to us. For several months. It costs a fortune. And then she can come to us approximately along this route: Moscow-Algeria-Paris-Riga. <…> This is not a problem for EU governments at all. It’s just that this is the only chance for those who have left to see their loved ones. This applies to children and the elderly as well. Yes, for our particular family this is a drama.

Ksenia Luchenko , journalist

[When trying to get a Schengen visa, especially in third countries] people wait in line at the consulate for months, collect a huge amount of documents, and then receive a visa for five days. That is, you left, you are sitting in Kazakhstan, Armenia, Montenegro or even America, but you need to somehow maintain connections, including for work. And before each conference or some other event, you struggle for several months with this visa, which they give you exactly for the dates of the event; you can’t even take a day to meet with friends. The nonsense is that this does not make anyone any better; there is no rational meaning in this punishment of the innocent.

Dmitry Travin , author of books on economic history and modernization

Almost for the first time in its history, Europe is purposefully cutting off Russian intellectuals from its culture, from the opportunity to see museums, monuments, and universities. <…> The current turn is fraught with ressentiment. Maybe, of course, as in Soviet times, young people, cut off from Europe, will only strive more for the forbidden fruit. But I think it will probably turn out differently. Interest in Eastern cultures will increase; fortunately, China, India, Japan, Thailand, the Emirates and many other countries have in many respects become much more attractive than during the years of the USSR. <…> Or maybe ressentiment will arouse interest in the fruitless, destructive search for a special Russian path. <…> A gloomy prospect. Both for Russia and for Europe.

Ivan Preobrazhensky , columnist for Deutsche Welle, expert on Central and Eastern Europe

The indisputable argument [in favor of abolishing multiple visas] is the perception of Russian tourism by millions of Ukrainian refugees in the EU. Although the most media-promoted case of such a collision recently was associated not with a Russian, but with a citizen of Latvia , it doesn’t matter. This is not only a morally indisputable basis for tightening the visa regime, but also a clear signal in the field of security - conflicts are not needed. However, there is another weak point here. According to this logic, it would be correct to completely refuse to issue short-term Schengen visas to Russians, as, for example, the Czech Republic did at the very beginning of the full-scale Russian aggression against Ukraine.

Mitya Aleshkovsky , philanthropist, general producer of the YouTube channel of historian Tamara Eidelman

It was you, European governments and officials, who led to this war by pumping Putin with money for gas and oil for years. <…> You received Putin in high offices, drank champagne at summits, awarded “golden visas” to his oligarchs and turned a blind eye to their real estate and accounts in Europe. And you continue to close it until now. You didn't do anything after Georgia. They did nothing after Crimea. And now you’re talking about the “order” with tourist visas. You should not make excuses for the visa policy, but for hypocrisy, cowardice and complicity - yes, you should.

Oleg Kozlovsky , Amnesty International Russia researcher

A long-term multiple-entry visa is a security issue for many. If you have it in your passport, you can, if necessary, find yourself in a safe country within a few hours, where you can request asylum or wait it out. Unfortunately, I don’t know of a single safe visa-free country for Russians, and practically none of them provide asylum.

And exceptions for human rights defenders have little practical use. Firstly, it is not only human rights activists who face serious threats now. Conditional singer Naoko: who would give her a human rights multiple visa? Meanwhile, for her it would be an opportunity to take a bus and be in Estonia in a few hours (if such a chance presented itself to her). And there are many times more people with a similar profile than classical human rights activists. Secondly, even real human rights activists may find it difficult to obtain a visa if they do not already have the necessary connections. <…> Thirdly, with this policy, the presence of a multiple-entry visa in itself will become a stamp of unreliability. Border guards will, at a minimum, flag such people, which will increase, not decrease, their risks.

Sergey Parkhomenko , journalist, coordinator of the Editorial Board award

The decision of the European Commission is an act absolutely outstanding in its stupidity, ineffectiveness and outright, even demonstrative helplessness. <...> And the absurdity here is not only that everyone who wants to be “not allowed” into Europe in this way (intelligence officers, saboteurs, propagandists, Putin’s lackeys, thieving oligarchs and corrupt officials with all their children and households) have long had diplomatic passports, or passports of other countries or “golden visas” for investing in real estate in Europe.

And also that they promise exceptions for journalists, activists and all sorts of “right people”. This is even greater stupidity. Because the presence of such an “exceptional” visa in the passport will be a direct indication that its holder is some kind of special person, from the embassy’s point of view. That is, people are asked to voluntarily obtain a certificate of “unreliability” from some embassy, ​​and then carry this certificate with them and present it to border guards and intelligence officers every time they cross the border.

Ivan Kurilla , American historian

About the “exception” for dissidents and human rights activists. Public figures of this status are already mostly in exile or in prison. Less public opponents of the war, who previously considered the opportunity to quickly leave for Europe as a “lifeline” in case of attention from the regime, are deprived of this opportunity, because they will only be included in the list of “human rights activists and dissidents” for the consulate after arrest.

Leonid Volkov , head of political projects at FBK

I know many brave activists who continue to work in Russia and consider a passport with a Schengen visa as a saving grace “for a rainy day.” This doesn’t always work (when they break in at six in the morning with a search and confiscate everything, a visa won’t really help), but there are many stories when people were able to quickly get out. The transition to issuing visas strictly “by travel day” deprives them of this opportunity.

Well, as for the fight against the real threat... Putin’s agents feel completely at ease in Europe, alas. With diplomatic passports, with “cover passports”, with passports of third countries. Or simply sitting in Moscow and recruiting small bandits in European countries through social networks - easily finding people willing to set fire to something in the crypt for a few thousand euros, smash it, vandalize it, or break it. This activity will not decrease due to the cancellation of multivisas. <…>

Elena Kostyuchenko , journalist

I have a younger sister, also an investigative journalist. Fortunately, we have different last names. She continues to work and live inside Russia, like some other journalists. <…> Each of them can be imprisoned or beaten/killed at any moment, and they understand this. But each of them still has hope that before the state comes to arrest or kill them, there will be a sign - a call from a source, a search, inclusion in the list of foreign agents. And there will be a few minutes/hours/days to try to go to a safe country instead of a prison/grave. Having a visa pasted into your passport in advance greatly increases their chances.

In addition, a multiple visa makes it possible to physically meet and coordinate with editorial staff in safe countries. You understand that not a single Russian editorial office in exile can work without people on the ground in Russia? But you can’t discuss everything over Zoom. <…>

Igor Eidman , sociologist and publicist

There is hysteria online about the cancellation of European multivisas for Russians. And in the Dnieper at night, a drone destroyed three floors of a high-rise building. Many were wounded, some died, and children were injured. What a trifle and nonsense these tattered visas of yours are against the background of the daily horrors of the aggressive war waged by Russia. Isn't it embarrassing to whine about it now?

Abbas Gallyamov , political scientist

Most of all, the “howl in the swamps” [due to the abolition of multivisas] is criticized by those who have settled well in the West.

Nikolai Mitrokhin , researcher at the Center for Eastern European Studies at the University of Bremen

<…> Most likely, the ban will lead to an increase in applications for political asylum and refugee. In general, the EU still operates in the paradigm of “give Putin more control over the population of the Russian Federation and their money, without allowing them to take refuge in the EU.” The fallacy of this strategy is obvious. <…>

Want to share your opinion? This can be done here.