Moscow forces Washington to reduce the staff of diplomats and employees in the US embassy and consulates in Russia, citing the need for "parity". This decision by Moscow is a brilliant chance for the European allies of the United States, says Yakub Yanda, head of the Kremlin Watch program and deputy director of the European Values ??(Prague) think tank, adviser to the Czech Ministry of the Interior on the influence of foreign powers in his article in The Newsweek..

The author believes: "For dozens of years, European countries are struggling with the problem of disproportionately large Russian offices in their capitals. Although no one calls for a break in diplomatic relations with Moscow (which would mean the complete closure of embassies and consulates), Putin's Russia is now conducting a full-scale subversive offensive against Western countries ".

According to Yanda, "the embassies and consulates of the Kremlin often serve as hotbeds of hostile intelligence activities".

And the governments of the European countries have their hands tied, because Moscow states: if you send 10 "ours", we will send 10 "your". "If the Kremlin has accredited 140 diplomats and administrative officers in the Czech Republic, and Czech diplomacy has only 65 employees in Russia, Prague can not exert strong pressure without losing its ability to conduct legitimate diplomatic activities in Russia," reads the article.

But Moscow's decision to severely cut the staff of US missions in Russia is a sign that the fight is now "without gloves". The author recommends that the ministers of foreign affairs "phone for the organization of joint actions. If at least 5-7 NATO countries want to take advantage of this chance, jointly demanding the application of the principle of "parity" to the number of diplomats, Moscow will not easily be able to teach them one by one. In the diplomatic sphere, Putin will be cornered, and he will have to reduce the staff of some missions in Europe ".

"This collective step would bring not only practical benefits (for example, it would disrupt the work of some of the Kremlin's espionage networks in these countries), but also major political dividends. It is difficult for President Trump to find a common language with America's allies threatened by Russia, and now Russia is hitting it directly. Small European countries are grateful to America for its "security umbrella," but they can not give much to Washington in return. This step, although strategically not so important as the presence of American troops and tanks in the Baltic States, would have become a clear signal of the Eastern European capitals to Trump: "We are at your side," concludes the author.