Hi Tomkat:

I understand what you are getting at, but on a purely practical level, it's not a good idea to visit other countries when they are in the middle of a war, either internal (civil war) or with another country.

I spent many years of my life working for the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in the middle of other people's wars. The ICRC are the folks you see in the news this week exchanging prisoners between Gaza & Israel. I can tell you from first-hand experience that no matter how nice the average citizens of a country are - and I don't dispute that Russian citizens are generally nice people - when a country is involved in a war, everyone gets tense, and all the little things that should normally be simple and straightforward become complicated and sometimes fraught with peril.

Heck, I remember that back in 2001, when the Americans were in the middle of their 'War on Terror' following the September 11 attacks, it was a real PITA for me, a Canadian citizen and a WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) to enter the USA! The customs folks were grouchy and tense, and the overall mood in the country was not what you would call serene.

Far better that the original poster postpone his trip until the current conflict ends. Russia will still be there, and he'll have a much more enjoyable trip than he would have at the present time - not to mention not having to put up with all the inconveniences you mentioned, such as not being able to use credit cards, ATMs, etc.

Michael

I respect your experience in warzones, and for sure I wouldn't propose going anywhere near an area of active hostilities, but Russia is a big country and for most people the war is as distant as it is to you and me. In 2001 as you say a number of western countries were involved in foreign military activities regarded by many as illegal, but that didn't stop visitors arriving and travelling. Not saying Russia's a particularly free or open society but if we're talking moral angles...

FWIW I have changed my future plans, which previously included quite a few miles in Russia, though that's more due to the practicalities than anything else. I reckon a few days passing through the Caucasus shouldn't present too many challenges - farther afield is a matter of personal choice. However anyone in Europe who wants to travel east is faced with passing through either Russia or Iran, with the choices and difficulties that entails. Similar applies to Afghanistan, arguably more so, but there have been a few (fascinating and sometimes quite hairy) stories told by intrepid travellers who have been through there recently.

As for waiting until sanctions are lifted, good luck with that. Neither Russian nor Iranian regimes are likely to see much change in the foreseeable future, neither do I see western sanctions being lifted from its traditional bogeymen for a decade or more.

To be clear, I'm not taking a position on the foreign activities or internal politics of any particular country, just pointing out that if one did want to travel through it, it can be done.

Des

A bit of context re: yes it can be done but:

https://www.euractiv.com/section/glo...tering-russia/

Not a law yet, but Russia has definitely both passed and actively, viciously enforced laws like that on its own citizens.

Hi Des:

Thanks for your response.

I might not have expressed myself as well as I wanted to in my post #5 above.

What I was trying to say is that whenever a country is engaged in hostilities, either internal or external, all interactions with government or quasi-government officials everywhere in the country become more tense, unpredictable, and fraught with peril than they normally are.

I cited my own entry into the USA back in 2001 as an example. In that case, I entered the country as a tourist, a citizen from a neutral 3rd country, via a land border crossing that typically sees over 100,000 vehicles a day transit between Canada and the USA, and it took hours to do so, compared to the normal "minutes". The conflict that the USA was involved in at the time was taking place halfway around the globe, but the effects on all travelers going in and out of the USA were very pronounced.

I suspect the same problem would exist today at any border crossings into either of the countries that are parties to the current Russia - Ukraine conflict (or Gaza-Israel conflict, or Libyan internal conflict, etc.).

I did not mean to express an opinion of any kind about the propriety of America's conflict in 2001, nor do I have an opinion of any kind about the propriety of the current Russia - Ukraine conflict, or any of the many dozens of conflicts that have taken place worldwide in the past 40 years. That's a holdover from my time working with ICRC, during which all of us had to take a position of strict neutrality at all times.

We could not afford to hold personal opinions - we just looked at these conflicts as "Team A vs. Team B". They were all the same anyway - one party to the conflict wanted to control land or people held by the other party. The motivations of the parties involved may have varied from conflict to conflict, but the objective was always the same.

That's a reasonable analysis, but usually there are small but significant shifts in "which way the wind is blowing" immediately after the end of active hostilities, even though all the policies, sanctions, rules, etc. that were in place during the hostilities are still there. I've seen this many times following either the end of hostilities or a mutually acknowledged pause in hostilities.

My guess is that this change happens because 99% of the people on both sides of the conflict are grateful and relieved that things have settled down (if only temporarily), and they long to get back to normal life and long to get back to welcoming visitors to their country.

Michael