Ivan Zubov
The Russian authorities have announced their intention to develop changes to the legislation in order to make the stay abroad "less comfortable" for the Russians who left the country since the beginning of partial mobilization. This was stated by Senator Andrei Klishas, head of the Committee on State Building and Constitutional Legislation. These words are actively commented on by experts in their blogs.
Political scientist Dmitry Mikhailichenko outlined the economic prospects for such a step:
“Against the background of the expectation of new waves of conscription in society, this statement will only increase the anxiety and position of those who believe that new waves of mobilization are inevitable.
In Belarus, it is through work with the management of enterprises in 2020-2021. managed to curb the protest wave. This path can also be taken as part of the fight against the so-called. deviationists and Russians who left the country, who will first be stigmatized and criticized in the media (up to and including “traitors” and “second-class people” who “should be deprived of citizenship”).
In other words, the Russian authorities can indeed quickly enough, both at the level of the law and at the level of disciplinary practice, instruct all enterprises to stop working with citizens who have left the country during the period of mobilization. Only this will work for the growth of the gray zone, in which the rigidity of laws is mitigated by the optionality of their implementation. Now this gray area in the economy is growing rapidly and has further prospects, especially if statements similar to the theses of Klishas continue to be broadcast.
All this shows that the authorities are concerned about the outflow of able-bodied men from the country and recognize this as a real problem. However, now there is no need for such tough measures to combat "the fugitives", especially since these measures will be very expensive for the country's economy, and the authorities are unlikely to increase the ratings. Nevertheless, the vector is obvious and tough measures are not excluded in the future.”
Publicist Pavel Pryanikov does not understand how to technically implement these plans:
Klishas' statements are similar to a PR campaign to intimidate not so much those who left as potential emigrants. Still, rather uncompromising people were the first to leave, now they are leaving not on emotions, but on a calculation.
It is not clear how technically they are going to separate those who have left? Only those who left after February 24, 2022? And if these people have received the citizenship of another country - for example, Israel, for which it is typical to leave Russian citizenship as a second one. And if someone left for treatment, study, or for other reasons not related to a political position?
Or how to technically determine where the work was done for the customer? What does a programmer, analyst or marketer specifically indicate at the end of the work “performed from such and such a country”? The customer does not care where the work is done, as long as it suits him.
In addition, those who left Russia are already seriously punished by financial slingshots, and this was done by the West, and not by our bureaucracy - the impossibility of transferring money through international payment systems, donation systems (like Patreon), serious restrictions on the transfer of cryptocurrencies and, in general, a huge suspicion of any Russian capital."
The head of the Political Expert Group, Konstantin Kalachev, urges not to make 100% emigrants out of those who have left:
“The creative and technical intelligentsia who left the hostilities, representatives of small and medium-sized businesses, the self-employed, are no different from those who left for other reasons.
People who know how to earn money, independent and self-sufficient, mostly below middle age, and young people, some families with small children, are leaving. Educated and well-to-do in a past life. The same middle class, the role of which was once so much talked about.
These are people who, if necessary, may well integrate into the countries of their temporary location, they simply will not return. Should they be scared?
Will Russia lose without them? Of course. But they will acquire the countries of their new residence. They left for the time being. As they seem in most cases. No need to make them immigrants.
To hasten their return with threats is a dead end. It would be short-sighted to give them for nothing to other countries”.
Political scientist Ilya Grashchenkov believes that the coming second wave of mobilization will force emigrants to settle even more firmly where they are:
“They really want to return those who left abroad, but they don’t know how exactly. Therefore, Klishas simply voices the general pain: “come back, otherwise it will be worse!”. In principle, among those who left are not only IT specialists, there are simple managers and even officials who, even during the time of the coronavirus, got used to working remotely. So they want to make them start worrying, to choose "who they are with." It is possible that lamentations will even work and someone will return on the wave of these rumors, especially since many have already spent too much money to live in rented apartments. But in general, a massive return can be expected only when the country as a whole becomes calmer. The FOM level of anxiety shows that the situation is developing exactly in the opposite direction. All this is backed up by rumors of an imminent "second wave" of mobilization and possible border closures. In addition, the state continues to send signals that the screws will continue to be tightened, and the “beautiful tomorrow” will be more like the day before yesterday. With this approach, it will be difficult to return those who left, even with the alleged goodies. The authorities really hoped that the relocated would be quickly replaced, but it turned out that the labor market is not at all redundant. The situation is unlikely to be resolved by any other methods than political ones…”
Political scientist Nikolai Evdokimov warns that Russian society is already tired of endless bans:
“The authorities have an understanding that the departure of qualified specialists abroad poses a threat to the Russian economy, but they are going to prevent this only by one method known to them - repressive. I think that in the near future such actions are unlikely to be taken, because. society is already becoming tired of prohibitive and restrictive measures. And if this happens, then it will not meet with special support in society. Yes, the general attitude towards those who have left can basically be described as “reproaches”, but this is more of a moral reprimand, the society does not register a request for any repressive actions in the legal field. Moreover, such actions will not be able to motivate those who left to return. Here we are talking rather about the fact that this will break their ties with Russia, and this will not benefit, including, the Russian economy..."
Political scientist Alexander Predein believes that by allowing all dissatisfied people to leave, the authorities only strengthen their positions within the country:
“If a person works for a Russian company, the employer pays all taxes. The only inconvenience is the limitation of cross-border payments, now it is possible to withdraw money (currency) from Russia only through several banks, and European and US banks are extremely reluctant to process such payments.
Many Russians leave, quitting their jobs, selling all their real estate, burning bridges with their former homeland, no matter what Klishas and others come up with, this does not concern such emigrants.
Unlike the USSR, which kept the borders shut, modern Russia allows the discontented to leave, which only makes the regime stable, because the remaining passionate majority is deprived of likely leaders of the protest..."