Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1903807957-scaled

Why it’s a bad idea to close US consulates in Russia

Withdrawing diplomats in response to bad behavior is self-defeating, particularly for the United States.

Analysis | Washington Politics
google cta
google cta

On January 23, massive demonstrations broke out across Russia, protesting the arrest of opposition leader Alexey Navalny. Russian authorities detained Navalny upon his return from Germany, where he spent five months recovering from a near-fatal poisoning. Outside Moscow, the largest protests erupted in the Russian Far East, where demonstrators fought back, braving frigid temperatures and beatings.

One of the Trump administration’s last foreign policy moves has jeopardized the U.S. ability to understand Russian society at this crucial moment. On December 19, the U.S. State Department announced that it was shutting down its two remaining consulates in Yekaterinburg and Vladivostok. This action leaves the U.S. Embassy in Moscow as the only place inside Russia representing American citizens and interests.

Closing U.S. consulates is not only a bad idea, it’s a self-defeating one. It hurts ordinary Americans and Russians and plays into Russian President Vladimir Putin’s preference for controlling information. If the closures go through, the United States and Russia find themselves back at square one, both sides having squandered all the potential progress of public diplomacy after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

It is worth taking a moment to review the recent history of this consulate-closure tit-for-tat. U.S. officials have pointed the proverbial finger at Putin. But Washington started using the tactic and escalated the situation from there, no doubt much to Moscow’s glee.

After the U.S. Congress justifiably ordered the Trump administration to sanction Russia over meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign (such are the risks of international subterfuge), Putin halved the number of personnel the United States was allowed to employ inside Russia. While inconvenient, that’s where the matter should have stayed. Instead, the Trump administration seized the storied Russian consulate in San Francisco.

After Russian assassins poisoned ex-spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter in England in March of 2018, the Americans responded by kicking out 60 Russian spies working under diplomatic cover in the United States. Fair enough. But then the Trump administration acted heedlessly: it ordered the Russian post in Seattle to halt operations. U.S. officials must have known what was coming: Putin not only expelled the requisite 60 American spies. He also shuttered the U.S. Consulate in St. Petersburg.

Ejecting diplomats is a time-honored signal of official displeasure in international relations. But it’s a tactic that hurts open societies like the United States more than places like Russia and China, where information is more monitored and restricted. And it not only hampers U.S. diplomats’ ability to understand their host countries and interlocutors — most of all, it harms regular citizens from both countries and hinders their attempts to get to know one another.

When Putin issued his personnel-cutting order, the first to go were local Russians — translators, secretaries, janitors — who ensured the smooth daily operation of the premises and whose livelihoods depended on it. When the consulates in Yekaterinburg and Vladivostok close, the 10 American officials who worked there will be reassigned elsewhere, but the 33 Russians they employed will be out of work. The savings to the U.S. taxpayer will be a paltry $3.2 million a year.

Russia’s enormous size — stretching across 11 time zones — only magnifies the importance of consulates. In order to procure a visa, Russian citizens are still required to attend in-person interviews with U.S. consular officials. Russians in Siberia and the Far East will have to travel all the way to Moscow just to get permission to visit the United States. It takes almost the same amount of time to fly from Washington, D.C. to Moscow as it does to fly from Moscow to Vladivostok (about nine hours). People living in Siberia and the Russian Far East see things differently than Russians in Moscow and St. Petersburg. It is impossible to understand this huge, multiethnic society by peering out through the sound and light pollution of the Moscow metropole.

Consulates play an important role in facilitating positive interactions between Russians and Americans. Believe it or not, many Russians like aspects of American culture and want to know more about it. Public diplomacy officers at U.S. consulates do a great job of connecting American expats with local Russians.

The Vladivostok consulate has also fostered links between citizens in the Russian Far East and their closest American neighbors in Alaska. Consulates also provide institutional support for Americans living and traveling abroad, whether they be journalists, academics, or tourists. Consular officers can help when Americans get into legal trouble or are harassed by the police, as sometimes happens.

It is tough to be a U.S. diplomat in Russia — American officials are often followed, monitored, and harassed. Some have reportedly suffered microwave attacks that left them disoriented, sick, and even disabled. In addition to the staffing restrictions, the State Department cited safety concerns as the reason for closing the consulates.

But for the average American expat or tourist, life in Russia is relatively safe and can be rewarding. Having the institutional link provided by the consulates might place a burden on U.S. diplomats, but it makes life easier and safer for American citizens abroad. And American journalists and academic researchers provide a huge service by helping us understand Russia’s environment, society, history, and even how the Kremlin operates in the shadows.

Having lived in Vladivostok and researched the history of the city, I admittedly have a soft spot for that particular U.S. consulate and its work. But it’s also true that Vladivostok is in an important strategic spot, located near the Russian border with China and North Korea. On weekends, Chinese tourists flush with cash take bus tours into Vladivostok to shop. Throughout the city, North Koreans provide a significant portion of the manual labor, fixing roads and renovating apartments. Many Russians drive cars right off the boat from Japan, steering wheels on the right side of the car. If the United States wants to know what Russia is doing in East Asia, and what the Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese are doing in Russia, it ought to stay.

President Biden and his team have vowed to be tougher on Russia. But Putin doesn’t care if the United States closes its consulates. A smaller U.S. diplomatic presence means that he has more control over his own citizens and over Americans living and working in Russia. By giving into Putin’s pressure and turning off the consulates’ lights, the United States is doing exactly what he wants.

Almost 100 years ago, on May 15, 1923, U.S. Consul General S. Pinkney Tuck lowered the Vladivostok consulate’s flag, departing for Japan the next day. Seventy years passed before Americans were allowed to return. If the consulates close again, Americans risk losing, for the foreseeable future, an important source of insight into Russia’s complexity. The Biden administration should retire this misguided and ineffective tactic.


Protest against Alexei Navalny's imprisonment, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia, Jan. 23, 2021 (Photo: Nick Mayorov)
google cta
Analysis | Washington Politics
Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi
Top photo credit: Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi 首相官邸 (Cabinet Public Affairs Office)

Takaichi 101: How to torpedo relations with China in a month

Asia-Pacific

On November 7, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi stated that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could undoubtedly be “a situation that threatens Japan’s survival,” thereby implying that Tokyo could respond by dispatching Self-Defense Forces.

This statement triggered the worst crisis in Sino-Japanese relations in over a decade because it reflected a transformation in Japan’s security policy discourse, defense posture, and U.S.-Japan defense cooperation in recent years. Understanding this transformation requires dissecting the context as well as content of Takaichi’s parliamentary remarks.

keep readingShow less
Starmer, Macron, Merz G7
Top photo credit: Prime Minister Keir Starmer meets Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and António Costa, President of the European Council at the G7 world leaders summit in Kananaskis, June 15, 2025. Picture by Simon Dawson / No 10 Downing Street

The Europeans pushing the NATO poison pill

Europe

The recent flurry of diplomatic activity surrounding Ukraine has revealed a stark transatlantic divide. While high level American and Ukrainian officials have been negotiating the U.S. peace plan in Geneva, European powers have been scrambling to influence a process from which they risk being sidelined.

While Europe has to be eventually involved in a settlement of the biggest war on its territory after World War II, so far it’s been acting more like a spoiler than a constructive player.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig
Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Saudi leans in hard to get UAE out of Sudan civil war

Middle East

As Saudi Arabia’s powerful crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), swept through Washington last week, the agenda was predictably packed with deals: a trillion-dollar investment pledge, access to advanced F-35 fighter jets, and coveted American AI technology dominated the headlines. Yet tucked within these transactions was a significant development for the civil war in Sudan.

Speaking at the U.S.-Saudi Investment Forum President Donald Trump said that Sudan “was not on my charts,” viewing the conflict as “just something that was crazy and out of control” until the Saudi leader pressed the issue. “His majesty would like me to do something very powerful having to do with Sudan,” Trump recounted, adding that MBS framed it as an opportunity for greatness.

The crown prince’s intervention highlights a crucial new reality that the path to peace, or continued war, in Sudan now runs even more directly through the escalating rivalry between Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The fate of Sudan is being forged in the Gulf, and its future will be decided by which side has more sway in Trump’s White House.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.