Think Immigration: When Visa Processing Moves Abroad: Lessons from Russia

For most visa applicants, the usual model is simple: apply at the U.S. embassy or consulate serving the country where you live. That model becomes much more complicated when routine visa services are suspended and applicants are directed to another country.

For more than a decade, I have practiced U.S. immigration law from Russia. Even before 2021, Russian nonimmigrant visa (NIV) applicants often applied elsewhere when appointment availability in Moscow did not fit their travel plans. If someone needed to travel on relatively short notice and could not obtain an appointment in Moscow, another post could be a practical alternative. Longstanding regulations and government policy have allowed flexibility for NIV applicants who are lawfully and physically present outside their district of residence.

After routine non-diplomatic visa processing at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow ceased in 2021, however, applying abroad was no longer an alternative. For most Russians, it became the only way to apply for a U.S. visa.

More recent State Department policy has made the location issue even more important. Guidance updated July 15, 2026 generally directs nonimmigrant visa applicants to apply in their country of nationality or residence, and immigrant visa applicants to interview in their country of residence or, if requested, country of nationality. Where routine visa operations are unavailable, applicants are directed to designated processing posts. The immigrant visa rules likewise generally tie place of application to residence, while allowing processing elsewhere in appropriate circumstances.

Russia is a good example of how this works in practice. Russian nationals residing in Russia are currently directed to Warsaw in Poland or Astana in Kazakhstan for nonimmigrant visa processing. On the immigrant visa side, Warsaw remains the principal designated post, while Almaty in Kazakhstan and Tashkent in Uzbekistan process IR-5 cases for Russian parents of U.S. citizens.

The problem is not that these posts are impossible to reach. It is that getting there can become a significant part of the case itself.

Warsaw, for example, looks relatively close to Moscow on a map. In practice, the trip can be difficult. Russian citizens need a Schengen visa, direct travel between Russia and the European Union has become much more limited, and the EU suspended its visa-facilitation agreement with Russia in 2022. An applicant has to obtain a short-validity Schengen visa, coordinate it with the U.S. interview date, travel indirectly, and spend considerably more money and time simply to appear for the interview.

Central Asia is generally easier for Russians to reach. Astana therefore gives NIV applicants an important alternative, while Almaty and Tashkent provide more practical locations for the immigrant visa cases assigned there. But getting to the interview is only part of the problem. Appointment availability, medical examinations in immigrant visa cases, passport return, the ability to remain abroad, and the possibility of additional or administrative processing can all affect the decision.

For immigration counsel, the practical question is no longer simply: Where can this case be processed? It is also: Can the client realistically complete the process there?

That means asking some very practical questions. Can the applicant enter the interview country? Can the necessary entry visa be obtained in time? How long can the applicant remain there? What happens if the embassy keeps the passport? If additional processing or another appearance is required, can the client realistically return?

In some cases, we are effectively dealing with two immigration systems at once: the U.S. visa process and the entry rules of the country hosting the U.S. consulate.

Russia is not unique. War, deteriorating diplomatic relations, security concerns, staffing restrictions, and changes in consular operations can force both nonimmigrant and immigrant visa applicants to process outside their home countries. When that happens, the practical ability to reach the designated post and complete processing there should be part of case strategy from the beginning. Given the recent “hub” system for the African continent that the State Department is implementing, these concerns will affect more people in the coming months and years.

A designated post tells us where the State Department is prepared to adjudicate the case. For the applicant and counsel, the equally important question is whether that arrangement actually works in practice.