comment: >
  
  I feel like this is the one thing we should definitely not do.
  Firstly, we need the direct line of communication to minimise the risk of escalation.
  Secondly, there could be people in Russia with some connection to our respective countries that would benefit from our embassies continuing to operate within Russia, which they almost surely would not if we close down their embassies in our countries.
  As such, there's little to gain, but a lot to lose, from closing down Russian embassies.
context: And Iran while we are at it. >
  
  They don't respect embassies anyway. >
  
  That's how you guarantee WWIII. >
  
  No kidding. I don't know much about the Lithuanian FM but if this is a suggestion, then he's a massive idiot. Most Embassies and Ambassadors are generally there to promote propaganda of their country of origin as well as to strengthen ties. Russia towing their government's propaganda isn't unusual even a little bit. To ban a major line of communication with a nuclear power is monumentally stupid and ensures that the war will not be coming to an end anytime soon. >
  
  
  “In many cases, there is little use in having an ambassador, a Russian ambassador, in any European capital. Because as we have seen, in most cases it’s no longer a diplomatic institution, it’s an institution of propaganda, covering up crimes of war and in general promoting a genocidal agenda,” Landsbergis told reporters at a joint press conference with his Baltic and Polish counterparts in Riga on Tuesday.
  
  Well he's sure right about that part.