1/ for those who truly need to flee: 60+ non-EU countries are visa-free for RUS. It is wrong to assume Schengen is the only safe zone on Earth.
Plus: our NCEE Allies never ruled out humanitarian cases or proper defectors.
2/ RUS state is hostile and our relations may worsen further. This is no time to increase security risks.
Short-term visas to Russians were half a million in 2021. Lower now, but still, number of cases too large to be manageable bearing in mind security needs.
3-6
3/ Why this notion of "punishment"? It is not "punishment" to deny short-term visits to foreign nationals. It is not a form of harm or endangerment. Controlling border entries is first and foremost a national security issue.
4-6
4/ The concept of "good Russian". What is a good Russian? Someone who dislikes the regime and flees? Or someone who goes underground and sabotages the war effort? I want the latter.
Russians *must* take responsibility for their country.
5-6
5/ A large % of Russians are deliberately passive and in denial about the war. They don't want to know the truth, they go along, keep their heads down, and just want a nice life. #visaban tells them loud and clear:
Russians *must* take responsibility for their country.
6-6
6/ Our Allies who border RUS are more exposed, have more focused minds, and express clear needs. It is arrogant and inappropriate to dismiss their needs with a couple of feel-good one-liners (which crumble under closer scrutiny, as I have just shown).
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
#Germany has thrown down the moral gauntlet at the #Russian Orthodox Church.
"The heads of the Russian Orthodox Church are currently leading their members and their entire church down a dangerous, indeed blasphemous path that goes against all that they believe"
"They are justifying a war of aggression against Ukraine – against their own and our own brothers and sisters in the faith. We have to speak out (...) [against] this nationalism, which arbitrarily claims that a dictatorship’s imperial dreams of hegemony are God’s will."
3-7
"How many women, men and children, too, in Ukraine have become victims of this hatemongering, this hatred and this criminal violence! Hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands, far too many!"
A: national security
B: it is also an economic sanction
C: political signal towards our own citizens
D: political signal towards Ukrainian refugees
E: political signal to Russian citizens
F: EU / NATO solidarity
2-15
A: national security
The EU has, rightly and openly, taken the side of Ukraine, and strongly opposes Russia. We give weapons to Ukraine. We have sanctions against RUS. Conversely, RUS state is hostile to our nations in many ways...
3-15
... and while we seek to avoid a direct conflict with RUS, we cannot be sure what hostile acts Moscow may further undertake against us. Given this situation of heightened antagonism, unprecedented since 1992, we must aim to increase the security of our states ...
1-23
I'm glad @ElbridgeColby has put this piece out. This is an important reflection we need to carry out together, on both sides of the Atlantic. I have some key disagreements on the way forward which I lay out below. But first, I encourage colleagues to read his article.
2-23
Mr. Colby should be commended for alerting European colleagues to some hard choices ahead, and for doing so in a manner that is specific and grounded: it has to do with the likely future profile of U.S. military capabilities - and its limitations.
3-23
While the overall diagnosis of the challenge may be correct, I disagree with the way forward for Europe based on my experience of how European states formulate their foreign and defence policies - and of how Allies perceive and indeed misperceive each other.
1-10
That we're even seeing a sizeable #Ukrainian counteroffensive shows that many observers had underestimated UA.
At a think tank event I attended very recently, one expert believed no counteroffensive would occur at all, another couldn't imagine any success if it did.
2-10
As noted by @noclador 3 weeks ago, and as now reported by @CNN - the op was prepared for, including wargaming it with Allied advice. Adjustments to Allied supplies were made.
3-10
Sceptics rightly remembered combat in the Donbas region in earlier months, when RUS always ended up inching forward, UA losses were high, and UA firepower was much lower than RUS.
But the set of longer-range fire capabilities Allies have given to UA have made a difference.
1-9 A quick thread to explain why this proposal is completely absurd.
So, the proposal is to request Russian applicants for EU/Schengen tourism visas to sign an anti-war declaration.
As Mr. Ischinger knows, this would expose the signatories to political persecution in Russia.
2-9 This would occur even if the EU Embassies do not publish the names of the signatories: the system would be known to exist, therefore Moscow would know that any Russian with a Schengen tourism visa opposes the war! Not even sure how they would leave.
3-9 Assuming they manage to leave: once in the EU, these individuals could immediately apply for political asylum and we would be practically forced to approve them all: they are known to be in danger of political persecution, and we even encouraged it, and provide the evidence!
1-8 Western military assistance is passing the inflection point between the earlier mix of urgent support and cautious scope expansion to a new era of long-term support & commitment to build up & sustain the Ukrainian armed forces of tomorrow.
2-8 The latest US package is the largest to date, at just under USD 3 billion. Many have noted the list of equipment didn't look like it could amount to that sum. As noted in the @WSJ, the package "also includes funding to train Ukrainian forces".
3-8 WSJ also notes that the mission to train & assist will be named and a 2- or 3-star general will be put in charge of it. Naming the mission is "significant bureaucratically" and "entails long-term, dedicated funding".