Washington has created a new diplomatic crisis between Russia and the US

The world's media is discussing another scandal initiated by the US diplomatic service. Washington has handed over to Russia a list of 24 diplomats who need to leave the country by September 3. The reason is the expiration of visas for staying in the country. For those who understand at least a little about the nuances of diplomatic protocol, it is clear how far-fetched and untenable such a reason is.

The geopolitical confrontation between Moscow and Washington has recently reached a high boiling point, so such a demarche on the part of the American authorities is quite a natural result. The start of a new round of tension was laid by the US authorities when in March, and then in April, US President Joe Biden imposed another anti-Russian sanctions. At that same time 10 Russian diplomats were expelled from Washington.

Here is how the Russian Ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov commented on the current situation: "In an effort to strike an additional blow to the Russian diplomatic presence in December 2020, The United States unilaterally imposed a three-year limit on the period of stay of Russian diplomats in the country and strongly recommended that 24 of our colleagues leave the United States before September 3, 2021. Thereby making it clear that they are not going to extend their documents. Moreover, we have been repeatedly pointed out that after three years, the accreditation of Russian diplomats will expire, driver's licenses and tax exemptions will cease to operate. In my opinion, the attempts of the partners to blame us for everything, and to appear themselves in 'white coats' are puzzling."

Apparently, realising the evidence of a biased attitude towards the Russian diplomatic mission, the representatives of the White House, as it has happened many times, tried to step back.

The head of the press service of the State Department, Ned Price, said that the actions of his superiors were misinterpreted by the Russian ambassador. Although, how could it be possible to interpret the statement of this same Price "incorrectly": "This was a response to the Russian government for its malicious actions. We continue to believe that at the present time there is a need for open communication channels between our governments, including through embassies. We will continue to assess the situation and report on the development of events."

It should be noted that "diplomatic games" and outright provocations have long been the "corporate style" of American-style cooperation.

Here are just some facts stated by the Russian ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov in an interview with the National Interest: "We have shown restraint for a very long time, despite the long-term, consistent and conscious deterioration of the life and working conditions of Russian diplomats in the United States. This includes the seizure of our property, and the expulsion of employees, when people were given only 72 hours to leave the country.

Until the last moment, we refrained from being drawn into a vicious circle of "exchanging blows". We have repeatedly offered our colleagues to "reset" the existing restrictions on the activities of each other's foreign institutions on a mutual basis. These calls were not heeded. Moreover, the working conditions of our employees continue to tighten."

In connection with a new round of diplomatic "misunderstanding" between our countries, it would not be superfluous to recall that only in recent days the Russian side has issued 22 visas to Americans going to work at the embassy in Moscow, while the United States has only extended the visa for the adviser-envoy.

Of course, if to take into account that Russia has been considered the main opponent of the United States in national security strategy since the Cold War, there is nothing surprising in such "diplomatic games".

It seems that on Capitol Hill, time froze at the mark of Churchill's 1946 Fulton speech. However, today poses global challenges to humanity that can only be solved by joint efforts. We would like to see Washington stop looking for non-existent enemies too and to move from a policy of confrontation to civilised dialogue.