Russia - which will occur first? Russia Visa-free entry for US citizens or hell freezing over?

Which of the following do you think will happen first?

#1 - Russian gov't implements visa-free entry for US citizens

#2 - hell freeze over (or the non-religious hell freezing over)

#3 - Russia joining the European Union

#4 - Russia adopts the Euro as its official currenty

:)

#5 - None of the above :^)

#5 - None of the above :^)

+1000!

non of them
US might increase its visa application fee something like 160 something first, then some other country including russia will charge amercan same price.

non of them
US might increase its visa application fee something like 160 something first, then some other country including russia will charge amercan same price.

The price increases to $140 in June.

I think what will happen (in the next year or two) is that the U.S. will make the visas for Russians valid longer (from 2 year max to like, say, 5) and the Russian side will make it easier for U.S. citizens to get visas and visas that are valid longer.

I guess we didn't really win the Cold War, did we? Russia is still very much
like its old self, the former USSR.

#5 - None of the above :^)

Yep, I agree with that. And I would put a much higher probability of the Euro disintegrating altogether before Russia ever joins it!

I've been traveling to Russia since 1988, when it took no less than 11 identical passport photos to get my student visa. Now we're down to just one passport photo for a tourist visa, but the rest of the process is still basically as onerous as it ever was. I'm kind of stunned at the lack of progress after 22 years.

Well, Russia follows reciporocal process in their consulate affairs. If a nation makes it difficult for the Russian citizens to get a visa why should Russia be making process of getting their visa for that nation's citizens any easier?
And that "we won cold war" thing... Well, Russia defeated Germany in WW2, shall Russians be travelling without a visa to Germany on these grounds? Yeah, and they did defeat France back in 19th century too :)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/10205688.stm

An obvious change would be ditching the invitation/registration regime. But I don't see it happening because too many people profit from it.

Which of the following do you think will happen first?

#1 - Russian gov't implements visa-free entry for US citizens

#2 - hell freeze over (or the non-religious hell freezing over)

#3 - Russia joining the European Union

#4 - Russia adopts the Euro as its official currenty

:)

#1 will never happen as Americans have been systematically socialized to associate Russia with its communist past, and thus from the cold war onwards look upon them quite skeptically.
2# hell will sooner freeze over then US-RUssia actually becoming close friends. Why? Look at history from the 50's onwards or so when the USA government's take on foreign policy was on "containment" of the threat of communisim - whereas today we see that there was no real threat from the spread of it. Just alot of propaganda forces at work.

#3 russia would make a valuable asset to the EU due to the vast reserves of oil and natural gas, however there are still way to many political differences between continental Europe and the former soviet state.
#4 quite unlikely. #3 must be met first.

Subject: Hell explained by Chemistry Student

HELL EXPLAINED BY CHEMISTRY STUDENT

The following is an actual question given on a University chemistry mid term. The answer by one student was so 'profound' that the professor shared it with colleagues, via the Internet, which is, of course, is why we now have the pleasure of enjoying it as well:

Bonus Question: Is Hell exothermic (gives off heat) or endothermic (absorbs heat)?

Most of the students wrote proofs of their beliefs using Boyle 's Law (gas cools when it expands and heats when it is compressed) or some variant.

One student, however, wrote the following:

First, we need to know how the mass of Hell is changing in time. So we need to know the rate at which souls are moving into Hell and the rate at which they are leaving. I think that we can safely assume that once a soul gets to Hell, it will not leave. Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for how many souls are entering Hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today.

Most of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, you will go to Hell. Since there is more than one of these religions and since people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all souls go to Hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in Hell to increase exponentially.

Now, we look at the rate of change of the volume in Hell because Boyle 's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in Hell to stay the same, the volume of Hell has to expand proportionately as souls are added.

This gives two possibilities:

1. If Hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter Hell, then the temperature and pressure in Hell will increase until all Hell breaks loose.

2. If Hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in Hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until Hell freezes over.

So which is it?

If we accept the postulate given to me by Teresa during my Freshman year
that, 'It will be a cold day in Hell before I sleep with you,' and take into account the fact that I slept with her last night, then number two must be true, and thus I am sure that Hell is exothermic and has already frozen over!

The corollary of this theory is that since Hell has frozen over, it follows that it is not accepting any more souls and is therefore, extinct......leaving only Heaven, thereby proving the existence of a divine being which explains why, last night, Teresa kept shouting 'Oh my God.'

THIS STUDENT RECEIVED AN A+

And that "we won cold war" thing... Well, Russia defeated Germany in WW2, shall Russians be travelling without a visa to Germany on these grounds? Yeah, and they did defeat France back in 19th century too :)

USSR passport-holders did not require visas to visit DDR.....:)

When will US gov't implement visa-free entry for Russian citizens? then Russia implements the same for US citizens. Hopefully, it will happen in our lifetime...
Right now Russians have to go through at-least-1-month humilating visa procedures, travel hours by plane/days by train for visa interviews, give fingerprins and answer questions like "Are you going to work as a prostitute in the US?" (even when you go for PhD studies).

Do you my American fellows go thorough the same hell with a russian visa?

When will US gov't implement visa-free entry for Russian citizens? then Russia implements the same for US citizens. Hopefully, it will happen in our lifetime...
Right now Russians have to go through at-least-1-month humilating visa procedures, travel hours by plane/days by train for visa interviews, give fingerprins and answer questions like "Are you going to work as a prostitute in the US?" (even when you go for PhD studies).

Do you my American fellows go thorough the same hell with a russian visa?
No, but nor are large numbers of Americans likely to overstay tourist/student visas to work/live illegally in Russia. This is a real problem for the US--not so much for Russia, at least where American visitors are concerned. I agree that the US visa process is onerous and annoying, and surely a bit much, but there is some basis for it.

N I agree that the US visa process is onerous and annoying, and surely a bit much, but there is some basis for it.
Again, why would the Russian government want to make life of Americans easier? Last time I checked Russian Foreign Office was funded by Russian residents, not tourists from across the pond.
Same applies to the US missions in Russia. If US public believes this is the way Russians should be treated, so be it.

Again, why would the Russian government want to make life of [overseas visitors] easier?
Because a country can earn a lot from tourism. Because a country that desperately needs foreign investment and economic diversification shoots itself in the foot by making it very difficult for businesspeople to visit. These are not difficult concepts to understand.

The uncomfortable fact is that a stunning number of tourists and businesspeople and students manage to visit the US anyway, even with the onerous visa process for those from non-VWP countries. Russia, not so much--even though the country could really use the cash from all those visitors. This article from Monday's NY Times is illustrative: Old-Style Visa Bureaucracy Stymies Pro-Kremlin Youth Retreat (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/06/world/europe/06nashi.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=nashi&st=cse).

Because a country can earn a lot from tourism. Because a country that desperately needs foreign investment and economic diversification shoots itself in the foot by making it very difficult for businesspeople to visit. These are not difficult concepts to understand.
Never fails to amuse me how you lot arrogantly assume American tourism or American investment s something any nation would kill for.
Russia had their fair share of the US "investment" in early 90s, when all of a sudden 90% of their national wealth ended up in the bank accounts overseas. Capital flows freely in the modern world and is not affected by visa regimes or issues with getting visas.
American tourism? If you care to check US citizens have spent on travel a total of $72.1 bil. Even if all this money went to Russia, this would only account for 5% of their GDP. How significant is that?

Never fails to amuse me how you lot arrogantly assume American tourism or American investment s something any nation would kill for.I am not talking about purely American tourism and investment. I am talking about tourism from every country in the world except for the visa-free nations of Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Brazil, Cuba, Israel, Macedonia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Montenegro, Serbia, Tajikistan, Thailand, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, plus tour groups from China (I believe that is the complete list). It's pretty clear that the wealthier tourists of the world are mostly stuck with the visa regime.
Russia had their fair share of the US "investment" in early 90s, when all of a sudden 90% of their national wealth ended up in the bank accounts overseas.Actually, US FDI into Russia has been pretty minimal. The capital flight was RUSSIAN-owned money fleeing into bank accounts in places like Switzerland, Bermuda, etc.--not money getting sprited away by foreigners who snuck into the country and carried it away. Your statement has nothing to do with the visa issue, nor is it even remotely accurate. (Who's the majority shareholder of Gazprom today? Norilsk Nickel? Sberbank? Rosneft? And so on.) My point about investment is that companies don't build factories--and institutional investors are less willing to buy shares in or lend money to companies--in countries they are not allowed to visit. This is manifestly the case in Russia.
American tourism? If you care to check US citizens have spent on travel a total of $72.1 bil. Even if all this money went to Russia, this would only account for 5% of their GDP. How significant is that?Once again, who said anything about just Americans visiting--and your numbers appear to be way off, by the way. The one number I found quickly, from Visa, was $42 billion in Americans' overseas spending on Visa credit cards alone in 2008--which certainly means that total overseas spending in cash, all credit cards, wire transfers, and travelers' checks would be vastly more than $72 billion. Tourism can be a significant part of GDP for any country--for the US it's about 3%, and that's 3% I wouldn't like to lose. For Europe, the percentages are significantly larger.

I am not talking about purely American tourism and investment. I am talking about tourism from every country in the world except for the visa-free nations of Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Brazil, Cuba, Israel, Macedonia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Montenegro, Serbia, Tajikistan, Thailand, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, plus tour groups from China (I believe that is the complete list). It's pretty clear that the wealthier tourists of the world are mostly stuck with the visa regime.
You have missed Hong Kong out. I don't believe wealthier tourists have any issues with the Russian visa. It is pretty painless as long as you don't mind spending around $500 for the same day processing and courier service.

your numbers appear to be way off, by the way. The one number I found quickly, from Visa, was $42 billion in Americans' overseas spending on Visa credit cards alone in 2008
I have no clue where you've taken your figures from. The $72 bil is the figure officially reported by the UNWTO - http://www.unwto.org/facts/eng/pdf/barometer/UNWTO_Barom10_update_april_en_excerpt.pdf Would you be able to provide a source to the information you claim is more accurate?
A significant share of money spent with credit cards are things like air-travel, travel insurance, etc. which do not benefit country travellers visit in any way.

To the investment point China is a perfect example of country which attracts billions of investment dollars without waiving entry visa requirements. Another good example would be Ukraine, which has lifted requirement for pre-entry clearance for the US and Western Europe a couple of years ago. Didn't help it a bit to bring additional investment into the country. It is the state of economy and return on investment which drives investments into the country, not visa requirements.

No, but nor are large numbers of Americans likely to overstay tourist/student visas to work/live illegally in Russia. This is a real problem for the US--not so much for Russia, at least where American visitors are concerned. I agree that the US visa process is onerous and annoying, and surely a bit much, but there is some basis for it.


The USofA can sleep well. Whoever wanted to leave Russia, already have.

The USofA can sleep well. Whoever wanted to leave Russia, already have.

Yes, I agree. But it needs to go both ways. This will happen if and only if, Russia gets invited to the list of visa waiver countries.

Yes, I agree. But it needs to go both ways. This will happen if and only if, Russia gets invited to the list of visa waiver countries.


No argument on my side. Nothing willl achieved by constantly telling Russians that nobody in their right mind would want to ilegally move to Russia.

There is no reason for waiving visa reguirements unilaterally for Russia.

The so called investors get their visa without any problem.
People coming for personal visits are not interesting from financial point of view. As for tourists - Russia is not a touristic country (like Italy for instance) and abolition of visas will not significantly influence the GDP.. Assume 20000 americans more come to Russia per year - that's like 20 M USD they spend during their trip (1000 per each).. For a country like Russia it's ridiculous to talk about that from a "profit" point of view

The only city that is somehow dependent from tourists is Saint-Petersburg but they do accept cruise passengers who do not need visa for 72 hrs.

As for US visas issued to Russians: the refusal rate is 4% now and that is enough to put Russia into VWP list but there should be some politics in this decision and I think that will not happen in the nearest future.

Taking into account other countries with rich tourists - there is:

1. Canada - same as US
2. European Union - there are talks about mutual visa-free travel to be implemented in several (say 3-5) yrs and it's senseless to do it unilaterally now. btw Europe gets much more from Russian tourists than on the contrary..
3 South Korea, Singapore - same as EU, probably a bit faster.
4. India and China - high migration risk to Russia and to EU through Russia (have to pay to EU in that case according to readmission treaty)
5. Australia. New Zealand. too far=)

No, but nor are large numbers of Americans likely to overstay tourist/student visas to work/live illegally in Russia. This is a real problem for the US--not so much for Russia, at least where American visitors are concerned. I agree that the US visa process is onerous and annoying, and surely a bit much, but there is some basis for it.

I used to know americans who work illegally in Russia staying on a business visa (and renewing it every 3 months) or some other non-work visa.. they usually work as private english tutors - of course without any license, without paying taxes etc,etc..
And this happens for a considerably long time - sometimes for yrs.
Yes, that's a usual thing for Russia and for Russians but assume this would happen to a Russian in US.. What would be the end of this story?
What would be the appreciation from the locals?

I am not talking about purely American tourism and investment. I am talking about tourism from every country in the world except for the visa-free nations of Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Brazil, Cuba, Israel, Macedonia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Montenegro, Serbia, Tajikistan, Thailand, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan, plus tour groups from China (I believe that is the complete list). It's pretty clear that the wealthier tourists of the world are mostly stuck with the visa regime.


+ Venezuela, Nicaragua
+ Chile, Colombia, Ecuador soon (in 3-6 months) - treaties were signed this sept.

Russia foreign policy states that visa free travel must be reciprocal between states and therefore Russia imposes the same restrictions on American citizens as USA imposes on Russian citizens. EU/EEA (UK and Ireland excluded) has a reciprocal agreement with Russia unifying visa costs and processing times and it is a goal for both Russia and the EU to eventually reach visa free travel.However as for now EU is not ready for it due to the free flow over some Russian borders, espcially the Kazakh one.

I found obtaining a tourist visa here in Oslo quite easy. I just went to the Russian embassy with all my documents, the officer then took a close look at the documents, I paid the fee and came back one week later (as I had good enough time to wait) to pick it up so I am off to Moscow 28th-31st October. Actually a very smooth process and the people at the embassy were quite polite and provided good service. So obtaining a Russian visa is not hard at all compared to the retard American visa process.... Luckily I am i citizen of Norway so for 90 days or less I only need the ESTA registration. As far as I am concerned Russians/other countries which are not visa free to Schengen don't need an interview for a Schengen visa compared to a US visa.

It is quite nice to enter Russia visa-free on my Brazilian passport, since June of this year. When I had to get visas on my passport to go to Russia the cost was cheaper on the Brazilian passport because even the costs were reciprocal.

Without question it is far easier and quicker for people to obtain Russian visas than for anybody to get a US one, and the VWP is not a panacea either. The problem here is not Russia, it's the US and the EU. Reciprocity is easy if the US and EU accept it. That, however, is not a fast process. National pride is a major impediment. Americans complain about the coast of visas for them, not realizing that many countries just monitor US prices for their citizens and offer reciprocal prices. Is that not fair?

It is quite nice to enter Russia visa-free on my Brazilian passport, since June of this year. When I had to get visas on my passport to go to Russia the cost was cheaper on the Brazilian passport because even the costs were reciprocal.

Without question it is far easier and quicker for people to obtain Russian visas than for anybody to get a US one, and the VWP is not a panacea either. The problem here is not Russia, it's the US and the EU. Reciprocity is easy if the US and EU accept it. That, however, is not a fast process. National pride is a major impediment. Americans complain about the coast of visas for them, not realizing that many countries just monitor US prices for their citizens and offer reciprocal prices. Is that not fair?

Yeah I agree with you regarding reciprocity, but the EU have a longer list of visa free countries than the US have including almost all of Southern America (Brazil, Venezuela etc) so I think it's about time we lift visa restrictions on Russian visitors too. We should also lift visa restrictions on Turkish citizens too if you ask me. If Mexicans have visa free access to Schengen, Turkish and Russian visitors should have too.

If Mexicans have visa free access to Schengen, Turkish and Russian visitors should have too.:confused: Why? Mexicans don't emigrate to Europe in hordes, like Russians or Turks do/would do. The US is geographically and culturally much more practical for that.

:confused: Why? Mexicans don't emigrate to Europe in hordes, like Russians or Turks do/would do. The US is geographically and culturally much more practical for that.

1. I don't think this comment is appropriate (Hordes?)
2. There's a big Mexican community in Spain.
3. If you care to actually research the subject rather than share your misconceptions (which I personally find racist) with everyone, you will notice Russia is hardly a big contributor to the EU immigration. It actually comes 10 (after Ukraine, Albania and the US) with most of immigration from Russia recorded in Finland and Latvia (would you guess the reason?). This is the source (http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-08-098/EN/KS-SF-08-098-EN.PDF).

If you care to actually research the subject rather than share your misconceptions (which I personally find racist) with everyone, you will notice Russia is hardly a big contributor to the EU immigration. It actually comes 10 (after Ukraine, Albania and the US) with most of immigration from Russia recorded in Finland and Latvia (would you guess the reason?). This is the source (http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-08-098/EN/KS-SF-08-098-EN.PDF).
By the way In this table Russia is below Albania that gets visa-free regime from 2011..
And the population in Russia is about 30 times more than in Albania..

:confused: Why? Mexicans don't emigrate to Europe in hordes, like Russians or Turks do/would do. The US is geographically and culturally much more practical for that.

Well, if you really think like that, than do answer what prevents Russians from emigrating right now..

Schengen visa in Russia now is a joke.. a lot of scrap paper, some time and some money.. and you get this visa and can migrate right now if you want..
the real problem is to collect all those papers that sometimes is the pain in the neck cause it needs a lot of time and after that to visit the consulate that's difficult especially if you live in a different city..

In most schengen states the refusal rate is smth like 1-1.5-2%..
it's really ridiculous to keep visas in the situation when 98-99 out of 100 get their visas.. and the majority of those 1-2% refusals are technical - means the applicants need to bring another paper and they get their visa next time.

Russia foreign policy states that visa free travel must be reciprocal between states and therefore Russia imposes the same restrictions on American citizens as USA imposes on Russian citizens. EU/EEA (UK and Ireland excluded) has a reciprocal agreement with Russia unifying visa costs and processing times and it is a goal for both Russia and the EU to eventually reach visa free travel.However as for now EU is not ready for it due to the free flow over some Russian borders, espcially the Kazakh one.


I think the problem is North Caucasus not Kazakh border..
Ok, some Kazakh or Tajik national can move to Russia but they still need a visa to EU to cross Rus-EU border as they have Kazakh\Tajik passport not the Russian one..
And if they want to cross the border illegally through some deep Russian-Polish forests noone can stop them even now =)

Well, if you really think like that, than do answer what prevents Russians from emigrating right now..

Schengen visa in Russia now is a joke.. a lot of scrap paper, some time and some money.. and you get this visa and can migrate right now if you want..
the real problem is to collect all those papers that sometimes is the pain in the neck cause it needs a lot of time and after that to visit the consulate that's difficult especially if you live in a different city..

In most schengen states the refusal rate is smth like 1-1.5-2%..
it's really ridiculous to keep visas in the situation when 98-99 out of 100 get their visas.. and the majority of those 1-2% refusals are technical - means the applicants need to bring another paper and they get their visa next time.

Well I've heard of lots of people who was refused a Russian visa because of some missing paper, but I got one at my first try. The embassy in Oslo is actually very good, and the people there also spoke quite good Norwegian. But as I said there is no reason to keep the visa regime between Russia and EU/EEA. We have a municipality in the county of Finnmark (border county to Russia) which has 20% Russian inhabitants and they stay legally and contribute quite well to the local community. No problems with them.

All of us in this thread may recall that there were not visas at all until a couple hundred years ago. Immigration and emigration will happen whatever we do. I agree with all those who argue against visas anywhere. The ostensible control is mostly a fiction anyway. With them, of course, political parties can make points with 'illegal immigration' or 'brain drain' or other such nonsense. Some slight libertarian tendency in me suggests that countries might need to provide better treatment and conditions for their own populace were they not given the chance to play with artificial restraints on population movement.

Over the centuries much of the movement from Russia to Lituania, Latvia, the Ukraine has been artificial, just as was the German (the people who called themselves Prussians, even though they were Teutonic knights) movement too. The US-Mexico, US-Cuba etc is deeply reminiscent of age-old issues, just as is France railing against Roma, and Germans against Turks. All these issues are ridiculous. People migrate to have better lives; if countries would allow that rather than engage in futile polemics the world would be far improved, IMO.

I realize this screed in slightly at odds with the main topic, but it does deal with the root cause of visa issuance difficulties.