The Ukrainian War IV: "And von Moltke Laughed ..."

[Infected Mushroom]

What do we think of the EU visa ban on Russians?

I think it's fair. Can't be party to a country bombing the shit out of a neighbor and consider it unfair that the other neighbors will deny you a cosy holiday destination.

Pretty much what Picairn said. There's a balance to be struck between "make the Russians feel it" and "hearts and minds". I feel that banning visas for Russians isn't particularly productive, and mostly contributes to the animosity. Hell, if we want to be a touch dramatic, we could even say it might contribute to a feeling of, wait for it, a "clash of civilisations" (I hate myself for referencing Huntington).

There is very little gained by blocking Russians from the EU. As Picairn pointed out, the folks who like to go to Europe, such as those with yachts sitting in some European marina or another, will not be deterred by this as they will probably put their connections into play—Gerhard Schröder, anybody?—and the ordinary Russian will be stuck, but with what reason, that is unclear.

It would also promote racism against Russians.

[The Free Joy State]

What do we think of the EU visa ban on Russians?

I think it's fair. Can't be party to a country bombing the shit out of a neighbor and consider it unfair that the other neighbors will deny you a cosy holiday destination.

From what I've read, the biggest issue with the proposal is that it will take away the easiest route for "good Russians" (anti-war, anti-Putin dissidents) to gain asylum in the US and EU countries. Going through the official channels for asylum is a difficult process, you must prove that you're politically persecuted before being granted asylum status, and the success rate is rather low since the paperwork burden is high and rejection rate equally so.

Typically, some Russians circumvent those burdensome requirements by the old-fashioned way: calling in favors from officials or institutions that they are acquainted with, get them to sign off on the paperwork and pull strings to get it accepted quickly. Otherwise, they'll have to wait months to be processed.

Any other channel for traveling abroad is also difficult on its own. Take the UK for example. Business visa? Where's your recommendation letter and leave permission from your employer? Academic? What is your research project and which foreign university is sponsoring you? Student? Have you received an unconditional offer to study at a university and do you have access to £9000 cash?

It all boils down to whether we still want "good Russians" to get the easy way out or to punish Russians as a collective. And I personally lean on the former, because the latter doesn't help the war effort at all, if not actively harms it. Getting good Russians on our side could help undermine Putin's political legitimacy.

At the very least, Russian anti-war activists, journalists, and political dissidents should be granted visas in all circumstances.

^ Basically this.

Anti-war activists, journalists, anti-Putin dissidents must have safe routes to flee from Russia, the easiest of which is being granted visas (I'd personally add anyone, especially those of fighting age, who opposes the war on Ukraine). Barring them from the EU not only risks their lives but threatens the battle for hearts and minds in Russia. The EU should welcome those who oppose Putin, give them a home and a voice. Not only will accepting them weaken Russia's fighting force, it will also work to weaken the narrative that Putin's attack on the Ukraine is supported by the people.

I consider a blanket ban to be somewhat playing into the hands of the Russian leadership.

That said, I'd agree with a more targeted ban barring the war's supporters and the billionaires who are financing the war, but -- considering their resources -- that would be difficult.

[Vistulange]

From what I've read, the biggest issue with the proposal is that it will take away the easiest route for "good Russians" (anti-war, anti-Putin dissidents) to gain asylum in the US and EU countries. Going through the official channels for asylum is a difficult process, you must prove that you're politically persecuted before being granted asylum status, and the success rate is rather low since the paperwork burden is high and rejection rate equally so.

Typically, some Russians circumvent those burdensome requirements by the old-fashioned way: calling in favors from officials or institutions that they are acquainted with, get them to sign off on the paperwork and pull strings to get it accepted quickly. Otherwise, they'll have to wait months to be processed.

Any other channel for traveling abroad is also difficult on its own. Take the UK for example. Business visa? Where's your recommendation letter and leave permission from your employer? Academic? What is your research project and which foreign university is sponsoring you? Student? Have you received an unconditional offer to study at a university and do you have access to £9000 cash?

It all boils down to whether we still want "good Russians" to get the easy way out or to punish Russians as a collective. And I personally lean on the former, because the latter doesn't help the war effort at all, if not actively harms it. Getting good Russians on our side could help undermine Putin's political legitimacy.

At the very least, Russian anti-war activists, journalists, and political dissidents should be granted visas in all circumstances.

That said, I'd agree with a more targeted ban barring the war's supporters and the billionaires who are financing the war, but -- considering their resources -- that would be difficult.

Right. Targeted sanctions previously were somewhat symbolic, and if we're being honest, a touch useless. When combined with more expansive and punitive sanctions on Russia's technology, investment, reserves, and so forth, they may actually be meaningful.

[The Free Joy State]

That said, I'd agree with a more targeted ban barring the war's supporters and the billionaires who are financing the war, but -- considering their resources -- that would be difficult.

Right. Targeted sanctions previously were somewhat symbolic, and if we're being honest, a touch useless. When combined with more expansive and punitive sanctions on Russia's technology, investment, reserves, and so forth, they may actually be meaningful.

Oh, I agree with you. The war should hurt. Sanctions should be heavy: investments, exports, business holdings, property holdings... But, while aiming to be punitive to those with the money and the power, I oppose is making it impossible for ordinary, anti-war Russians to get out. In fact, some professions should be positively encouraged to leave -- to enhance the brain-drain (scientists, educators, etc).

[Salus Maior]

What do we think of the EU visa ban on Russians?

I think it's fair. Can't be party to a country bombing the shit out of a neighbor and consider it unfair that the other neighbors will deny you a cosy holiday destination.

I think it's very debatable to suggest that most regular Russians are party to the war.

It wasn't as if they had a referendum on invading Ukraine.

That being said, if it further pressures Russia to end the war I might support the ban anyway.

[Vistulange]

Right. Targeted sanctions previously were somewhat symbolic, and if we're being honest, a touch useless. When combined with more expansive and punitive sanctions on Russia's technology, investment, reserves, and so forth, they may actually be meaningful.

Oh, I agree with you. The war should hurt. Sanctions should be heavy: investments, exports, business holdings, property holdings... But, while aiming to be punitive to those with the money and the power, I oppose is making it impossible for ordinary, anti-war Russians to get out. In fact, some professions should be positively encouraged to leave -- to enhance the brain-drain (scientists, educators, etc).

Absolutely. Skilled workers ought to be encouraged to leave Russia and settle and work in the West, ideally with nice bonuses, permanent residence with proper paths to citizenship, whatnot. Brain drain against Russia needs to be facilitated to further grind their technology and economy to a halt.

Then again, some folks on NSG did consider this "genocide" against Russia and the Russian people when it was briefly gone over in the prior iteration of this thread, so I don't know.

[Shamhnan Insir]

What do we think of the EU visa ban on Russians?

I think it's fair. Can't be party to a country bombing the shit out of a neighbor and consider it unfair that the other neighbors will deny you a cosy holiday destination.

I think it's very debatable to suggest that most regular Russians are party to the war.

It wasn't as if they had a referendum on invading Ukraine.

That being said, if it further pressures Russia to end the war I might support the ban anyway.

I get the point on "not having a say in the war" and yes as others have said more targeted methods would be much more useful.
However as a very different tool to begin turning the screws on Russia a bit more it's not an invalid notion, we need this war ended.

[Continental Free States]

I don't get where this "not a say in the war" thing comes. Not only is it untrue -for all that we can confirm, the bulk of Russia in fact does support the war in Ukraine-, it's also irrelevant. Since when does anyone take into account the amount of popular support an action taken by an authoritarian government has when trying to impose a punitive measure on that state over that action? Short of objective human rights things (i.e. banning entry of food or medicines, etc.), any sanction levied on the Russian people is justified.

[New Baltenstein]

Right. Targeted sanctions previously were somewhat symbolic, and if we're being honest, a touch useless. When combined with more expansive and punitive sanctions on Russia's technology, investment, reserves, and so forth, they may actually be meaningful.

Oh, I agree with you. The war should hurt. Sanctions should be heavy: investments, exports, business holdings, property holdings... But, while aiming to be punitive to those with the money and the power, I oppose is making it impossible for ordinary, anti-war Russians to get out. In fact, some professions should be positively encouraged to leave -- to enhance the brain-drain (scientists, educators, etc).

Counter-argument: enabling anti-Putinist Russians to leave en masse while cement the totalitarian stagnation of the Russian state and society even further and make any sort of inner revolution much more unlikely.

OTOH, according to most Russian journos I am reading, that ship seems to have pretty much sailed anyway. The opposition is scared, fragmentated and has no influential figurehead of any kind - other than Navalny, whom Putin can arrange to be killed on a whim. The overwhelming majority of Russian society seems to have apathetically accepted their lot to become a bigger and slightly less poor North Korea.

[Saiwania]

Absolutely. Skilled workers ought to be encouraged to leave Russia and settle and work in the West, ideally with nice bonuses, permanent residence with proper paths to citizenship, whatnot. Brain drain against Russia needs to be facilitated to further grind their technology and economy to a halt.

But on the flip side, those people can't exactly be trusted by virtue of being from Russia. If they hold any old loyalties to any degree, it isn't worth bringing them in. Many will be sleeper agents or spies.

[Latorik]

Absolutely. Skilled workers ought to be encouraged to leave Russia and settle and work in the West, ideally with nice bonuses, permanent residence with proper paths to citizenship, whatnot. Brain drain against Russia needs to be facilitated to further grind their technology and economy to a halt.

But on the flip side, those people can't exactly be trusted by virtue of being from Russia. If they hold any old loyalties to any degree, it isn't worth bringing them in. Many will be sleeper agents or spies.

Bruh the FSB and GRU have far more effective channels of funneling spies into foreign countries

And even if there does happen to be a few spies that slips through the cracks, Five Eyes has proven they're more than capable of routing networks when they pop up.

Existing security measures for this are probably already in place

[Sky Reavers]

I wonder, what in the end of this war Russia gonna gain and lose?

I remember, how 23 Febuary, the day before the war, I thought, that Russia won't attack, because if they do such a rash decision, they will have to deal with tons of consequences.
Well, I was somewhat right. They attacked and they face tons of consequences.

[Deblar]

I wonder, what in the end of this war Russia gonna gain and lose?

I remember, how 23 Febuary, the day before the war, I thought, that Russia won't attack, because if they do such a rash decision, they will have to deal with tons of consequences.
Well, I was somewhat right. They attacked and they face tons of consequences.

If they’re lucky, maybe an extra globally unrecognized puppet state in south Ukraine or something. Whether that would be worth the casualties and economic damage from the sanctions, I’ll let you be the judge.

[Sky Reavers]

If they’re lucky, maybe an extra globally unrecognized puppet state in south Ukraine or something. Whether that would be worth the casualties and economic damage from the sanctions, I’ll let you be the judge.

I am not from Russia. I am Ukrainian, so I can't exactly judge this, only assume that it will be not. Shit, still I remember, how I thought, that all these preparations were saber rattling. Was worried a bit but tried to not worry. Wondered about fire inspection on my job. And then, I the morning, I hear the explosions. At first thought, that maybe some ire exploded or something... then, more explosions. Not like anything I heared before. I realized... they really started the war. To me it was somewhat surrealistic. And I alos thought, it won't last too long.

[Vistulange]

I wonder, what in the end of this war Russia gonna gain and lose?

I remember, how 23 Febuary, the day before the war, I thought, that Russia won't attack, because if they do such a rash decision, they will have to deal with tons of consequences.
Well, I was somewhat right. They attacked and they face tons of consequences.

The ideal situation would be locking Ukraine into a frozen conflict like Georgia faces with Abkhazia and South Ossetia, establishing a land connection to Crimea, and dismembering Ukraine's industrial eastern oblasts. Considering the destruction we are witnessing, the latter might be considered accomplished.

However, the question is, hadn't the invasion in 2014 and occupying portions of the Luhansk and Donetsk Oblasts achieved the same thing, in regards to frozen conflicts? Either they hadn't, or that wasn't the primary goal when Russia decided to invade. We can reasonably infer from the accidentally posted RIA Novosti article a day after the war began that they fully intended to decapitate the pro-European Ukrainian government and secure Russia's sphere of influence, so it seems to have been a bit bigger than merely pulling a Georgia on Ukraine. Nevertheless, that's failed.

The best Russia can hope for, at this point, is a land connection to Crimea, some globally unrecognised statelets along that new border where their troops are, and perpetual sanctions that'll doom them to lagging behind a decade or two behind the rest of the world.

[The Free Joy State]

Oh, I agree with you. The war should hurt. Sanctions should be heavy: investments, exports, business holdings, property holdings... But, while aiming to be punitive to those with the money and the power, I oppose is making it impossible for ordinary, anti-war Russians to get out. In fact, some professions should be positively encouraged to leave -- to enhance the brain-drain (scientists, educators, etc).

Counter-argument: enabling anti-Putinist Russians to leave en masse while cement the totalitarian stagnation of the Russian state and society even further and make any sort of inner revolution much more unlikely.

OTOH, according to most Russian journos I am reading, that ship seems to have pretty much sailed anyway. The opposition is scared, fragmentated and has no influential figurehead of any kind - other than Navalny, whom Putin can arrange to be killed on a whim. The overwhelming majority of Russian society seems to have apathetically accepted their lot to become a bigger and slightly less poor North Korea.

It's a fair point encouraging potential opponents to leave making internal revolution unlikely (though revolution often seems unlikely until it happens).

However, isn't it better that those Russians most likely to lead technological and scientific advances be in a friendly nation? After all, in this connected globe an opposition no longer needs to be in the country to be an effective opposition. The internet has even acted as a catalyst for revolution (i.e. the Arab Spring); for clarity I'm not saying it's the same situation, I'm just saying the opposition doesn't have to remain in Russia, where their safety is threatened by the act of being in opposition).

[Emotional Support Crocodile]

I wonder, what in the end of this war Russia gonna gain and lose?

I remember, how 23 Febuary, the day before the war, I thought, that Russia won't attack, because if they do such a rash decision, they will have to deal with tons of consequences.
Well, I was somewhat right. They attacked and they face tons of consequences.

I can't really see the US and UK etc saying okay we'll remove the sanctions. They are going to face continuing sanctions and a renewed cold war. It's going to fuck up all the economic progress their Italian sized economy has made in the last few decades. There only choice will be to cosy up to China at the price of being dominated by them.

[The Free Joy State]

I wonder, what in the end of this war Russia gonna gain and lose?

I remember, how 23 Febuary, the day before the war, I thought, that Russia won't attack, because if they do such a rash decision, they will have to deal with tons of consequences.
Well, I was somewhat right. They attacked and they face tons of consequences.

The ideal situation would be locking Ukraine into a frozen conflict like Georgia faces with Abkhazia and South Ossetia, establishing a land connection to Crimea, and dismembering Ukraine's industrial eastern oblasts. Considering the destruction we are witnessing, the latter might be considered accomplished.

However, the question is, hadn't the invasion in 2014 and occupying portions of the Luhansk and Donetsk Oblasts achieved the same thing, in regards to frozen conflicts? Either they hadn't, or that wasn't the primary goal when Russia decided to invade. We can reasonably infer from the accidentally posted RIA Novosti article a day after the war began that they fully intended to decapitate the pro-European Ukrainian government and secure Russia's sphere of influence, so it seems to have been a bit bigger than merely pulling a Georgia on Ukraine. Nevertheless, that's failed.

The best Russia can hope for, at this point, is a land connection to Crimea, some globally unrecognised statelets along that new border where their troops are, and perpetual sanctions that'll doom them to lagging behind a decade or two behind the rest of the world.

I don't think China will let them lag behind the rest of the world.

China is increasingly helping Russia as they draw into their authoritarian corner, providing Russia with goods (now up by 80%) so that the sanctions don't bite so much, while also increasing prices on some Chinese goods (such as cars) in Russia (because Russian consumers don't have much choice). It's at the point where Russia is now said to be becoming China's "junior partner".

Putin's end-game may have been to capture the south of Ukraine (I actually suspect his aims were broader than that), but -- while I agree they'll likely end with no more than a land corridor that no more than China and North Korea recognise, and be sanctioned heavily by the west -- I actually don't think they'll fall decades behind (unless China get sanctions, too). Instead, they'll be dependent on Xi's largesse and be, functionally, a pariah state.

[Picairn]

Letting political dissidents and anti-war activists flee to the West and giving them a voice would be, I think, more useful in the propaganda war than leaving them behind to be silenced inside Russia. These people are native to the Russian political climate and mass media environment, and they can lead the main effort in organizing against the state TV propaganda apparatus and the disinformation campaign put out by the Kremlin. Or so I hope.

I don't expect our good Russian dissidents' counter-propaganda on its own to have any significant effect now, and it will likely only take off after undeniable military defeats. The recent fall of Lysychansk and capture of Luhansk Oblast had the entire Russian state TV networks crowing in triumph (remember that the average Russian outside Moscow mainly consumes state TV news), and only a reversal of fortune on the frontline can depress the propaganda victory the Kremlin is enjoying. No amount of lies or falsehoods can cover for the implications of a general retreat.

The way forward is clear: Ukraine must push back the Russians, to create cracks not just in the Russian military situation, but also on their wall of disinformation. The West must do whatever it can to facilitate this goal, barring direct intervention. Military defeats are the biggest signal that the enormous sacrifices the Kremlin has made and the Russian public has suffered for is no longer profitable, and thus meaningless.

[The North Polish Union]

I would be reluctant to allow further emigration from Russia and support the visa ban. My position in the last thread that permitting an exodus of Russians was not genocide was merely a statement that it wouldn't be genocide, nothing more. I noted in that thread that I disagreed with the suggestions.

Russian diaspora populations have traditionally been notable for supporting the Moscow regime. This may not be true in America where many NSG posters are from (since only dissidents that managed to escape left in communist times and since then Russia -> US immigration has not been especially popular; I will note that at least one of NSG's most prolific Russian apologists lives in California though), but it is certainly true in most of the states outside the Russian Federation having a significant Russian population. As noted above, permitting further exodus from Russia will only strengthen the grip of Putin/cronies on RF society, and it will likely serve to weaken the resolve of democratic nations elsewhere because of the increase in pro-Russia voting blocs.

An additional related issue is this: when Poland offered asylum to many of the 2020 protestors from Biełaruś it was later found that among them were many agents of the KDB-RB sent to demoralize and discredit the function of opposition organizations within Poland. The increase of foreign spies also created headaches for our own state security. Any asylum project for 'dissident' Russians would face an even worse issue with FSB infiltration (this contrasts with Ukrainian refugees, where there is little motive for the SBU to infiltrate such groups). The increase of foreign terrorism and espionage is not a reality which we want to encourage.

[Vistulange]

The ideal situation would be locking Ukraine into a frozen conflict like Georgia faces with Abkhazia and South Ossetia, establishing a land connection to Crimea, and dismembering Ukraine's industrial eastern oblasts. Considering the destruction we are witnessing, the latter might be considered accomplished.

However, the question is, hadn't the invasion in 2014 and occupying portions of the Luhansk and Donetsk Oblasts achieved the same thing, in regards to frozen conflicts? Either they hadn't, or that wasn't the primary goal when Russia decided to invade. We can reasonably infer from the accidentally posted RIA Novosti article a day after the war began that they fully intended to decapitate the pro-European Ukrainian government and secure Russia's sphere of influence, so it seems to have been a bit bigger than merely pulling a Georgia on Ukraine. Nevertheless, that's failed.

The best Russia can hope for, at this point, is a land connection to Crimea, some globally unrecognised statelets along that new border where their troops are, and perpetual sanctions that'll doom them to lagging behind a decade or two behind the rest of the world.

I don't think China will let them lag behind the rest of the world.

China is increasingly helping Russia as they draw into their authoritarian corner, providing Russia with goods (now up by 80%) so that the sanctions don't bite so much, while also increasing prices on some Chinese goods (such as cars) in Russia (because Russian consumers don't have much choice). It's at the point where Russia is now said to be becoming China's "junior partner".

Putin's end-game may have been to capture the south of Ukraine (I actually suspect his aims were broader than that), but -- while I agree they'll likely end with no more than a land corridor that no more than China and North Korea recognise, and be sanctioned heavily by the west -- I actually don't think they'll fall decades behind (unless China get sanctions, too). Instead, they'll be dependent on Xi's largesse and be, functionally, a pariah state.

While this is true in some cases, it isn't true in others. China can provide Russia with some goods, but they can't provide Russia with the high technology they require, lest they also fall under sanctions. Now, whether the Western world has the political will and capital to implement those sanctions if China crosses that line is another debate, but it's also a two-way road: just how willing is China to take that risk?

But we largely agree with each other here. This road only leads to Russia becoming, in effect, a Chinese tributary state, not much else. A bigger North Korea, with more natural resources, more nuclear warheads, and a shitshow in everything else.

I would be reluctant to allow further emigration from Russia and support the visa ban. My position in the last thread that permitting an exodus of Russians was not genocide was merely a statement that it wouldn't be genocide, nothing more. I noted in that thread that I disagreed with the suggestions.

Russian diaspora populations have traditionally been notable for supporting the Moscow regime. This may not be true in America where many NSG posters are from (since only dissidents that managed to escape left in communist times and since then Russia -> US immigration has not been especially popular; I will note that at least one of NSG's most prolific Russian apologists lives in California though), but it is certainly true in most of the states outside the Russian Federation having a significant Russian population. As noted above, permitting further exodus from Russia will only strengthen the grip of Putin/cronies on RF society, and it will likely serve to weaken the resolve of democratic nations elsewhere because of the increase in pro-Russia voting blocs.

An additional related issue is this: when Poland offered asylum to many of the 2020 protestors from Biełaruś it was later found that among them were many agents of the KDB-RB sent to demoralize and discredit the function of opposition organizations within Poland. The increase of foreign spies also created headaches for our own state security. Any asylum project for 'dissident' Russians would face an even worse issue with FSB infiltration (this contrasts with Ukrainian refugees, where there is little motive for the SBU to infiltrate such groups). The increase of foreign terrorism and espionage is not a reality which we want to encourage.

Eh, NSG is a piss-poor metric for any sort of population. Hell, the internet in general is a piss-poor metric for any population. There's a reason we're not fans of internet based surveys in the social sciences.

[Haganham]

The ideal situation would be locking Ukraine into a frozen conflict like Georgia faces with Abkhazia and South Ossetia, establishing a land connection to Crimea, and dismembering Ukraine's industrial eastern oblasts. Considering the destruction we are witnessing, the latter might be considered accomplished.

However, the question is, hadn't the invasion in 2014 and occupying portions of the Luhansk and Donetsk Oblasts achieved the same thing, in regards to frozen conflicts? Either they hadn't, or that wasn't the primary goal when Russia decided to invade. We can reasonably infer from the accidentally posted RIA Novosti article a day after the war began that they fully intended to decapitate the pro-European Ukrainian government and secure Russia's sphere of influence, so it seems to have been a bit bigger than merely pulling a Georgia on Ukraine. Nevertheless, that's failed.

The best Russia can hope for, at this point, is a land connection to Crimea, some globally unrecognised statelets along that new border where their troops are, and perpetual sanctions that'll doom them to lagging behind a decade or two behind the rest of the world.

I don't think China will let them lag behind the rest of the world.

China is increasingly helping Russia as they draw into their authoritarian corner, providing Russia with goods (now up by 80%) so that the sanctions don't bite so much, while also increasing prices on some Chinese goods (such as cars) in Russia (because Russian consumers don't have much choice). It's at the point where Russia is now said to be becoming China's "junior partner".

Putin's end-game may have been to capture the south of Ukraine (I actually suspect his aims were broader than that), but -- while I agree they'll likely end with no more than a land corridor that no more than China and North Korea recognise, and be sanctioned heavily by the west -- I actually don't think they'll fall decades behind (unless China get sanctions, too). Instead, they'll be dependent on Xi's largesse and be, functionally, a pariah state.

China has it's own problems and will soon be in no position to help anyone

[Perikuresu]

Ngl, I expected Novorossiya to return in some way shape or form, but given the recent announcement of an annexation referendum in Zaporizhzhia (+ we already know there's gonna be one in Kherson and Luhansk) I think Putin's just scrapped the whole project entirely (ok, that was already known for years, but I thought it'd still linger) and decided to just take out the middle man and annex these territories outright.

Also it seems a bit counter intuitive to recognised DPR and LPR as nations just to annex them into Russia imo, maybe that's why they're doing it with Zaporizhzhia and Kherson first ig

[Imperial Deutsch Union]

What the hell are the Russians putting in their cigarettes? Whatever's in them, it's strong enough to wipe out an air force base and I want some.

I agree, oh Und what a glorious und beautiful flag mein Deutschland brother(and/or sister idk lol)...keep up das geat work!

[Risottia]

There is very little gained by blocking Russians from the EU. As Picairn pointed out, the folks who like to go to Europe, such as those with yachts sitting in some European marina or another, will not be deterred by this as they will probably put their connections into play—Gerhard Schröder, anybody?—and the ordinary Russian will be stuck, but with what reason, that is unclear.

The ordinary Russian cannot afford going on holiday to the EU, as the average GDP(nominal)/capita of Russia is 12 k$.
If the oligarchs' connections are just Schröder, well, we can be rather safe in assuming they'll stay out, as Schröder doesn't wield power enough to overrule the Bundesregierung.