|
|
Home | Switchboard | Unix Administration | Red Hat | TCP/IP Networks | Neoliberalism | Toxic Managers |
| (slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and bastardization of classic Unix | |||||||
"I have been saying for years that it is time for the world to dump the dollar as reserve
currency, and maybe this time it will really happen. "
Sanctions on false premises are unacceptable and need to be fought. But the question is how?
Attack on dollar might provoke the USA on really drastic measures. So why to do that? Dollar
hegemony as the primary reserve currency is just a part of the story. The larger story is the world
neoliberal system. The USA is imperial power of the global neoliberal empire, so to speak. So it can
dictate other players what to do, and often does. As long as neoliberalism is the social system that
dominant on the globe.
IMHO Russia needs to be extremely careful with designing the countermeasures for the recent round of
sanctions. The key idea of the new round of sanctions is to limit export capacity of Russia to EU
and to provoke internal discontent due to sliding standard of living and create preconditions for a
color revolution. Preventing that is the key countermeasure. So for example launching some new
chemical plants that consume a lot of gas (producing fertilizers, or plastics, for example) makes
perfect sense. You can sell chemicals instead of gas and probably can get additional profit because
you do not need to transport gas several thousand miles West.
the standard countermeasure is import substitution but it will not work in many areas. For example
in chips Russia is almost totally dependent on the West and China. I think they have only one or two
own CPUs (Elbrus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbrus_(computer) ). All PCs and software are of
Western origin (China produced of cause). They also produce one open source CPUs (SPARC), but that's
almost it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russian_microprocessors
Similarly complex equipment with geo steering necessary to increase output from the old oil fields
is not produced in Russia (BTW this equipment dooms Trump idea of Mexican wall ;-).
So the key here is not to overreact and preserve cool head. May be just taking the blow and keep
standing is the best policy. Otherwise, if as the result of overreaction the standard of living
drops, Russia can slide into Venezuela-style situation, or, even worse -- provoke Brazilian-style
the revolt of oligarchs (which will be happily financed by the West), or Argentinian style
transition of power based of fake promises of neoliberal candidate. Sanctions tend to aggravate
internal problems in Russian society and that is the calculation of the US congress. Now some
Russian oligarch now will lose money. Sometimes serious money. As in neoliberal society "appetite
comes with the meal" and "greed is good" Sechin's, and others loyalty to the state is not absolute.
As Russia is still a neoliberal country resistance to the global neoliberal empire (even decaying
and with discredited ideology) is a very tough option. Especially open revolt against the dollar
hegemony. That's the key advantage of the USA in this game: fifth column that benefits from
neoliberal globalization if a serious force in any neoliberal country.
In any case, I think Russia should take considerable time to create viable countermeasures, which
need to be highly asymmetrical: beneficial for Russian producers and still nor too harmful for the
USA. Because the risk is to provoke the USA for another round of sanctions. May be selling some part
of reserves kept in dollars also make sense, as a symbolic gesture. I do not know.
I would think some aggressive "liberalization" of arm export is one possible reaction. Iran would
buy a lot of air-defense equipment, I think. If the USA do not allow to earn money in energy, Russia
needs to find a decent substitute. And in some categories of weapons Russia can give the USA run for
the money. See http://www.businessinsider.com/arms-sales-by-the-us-and-russia-2014-8
Unfortunately currently there is no alternative to neoliberalism. But cheap oil (by which I means
oil below $100 per barrel) might not last another decade, so it makes sense to wait for the end of
"chap oil age". which will be a knockdown for the USA. Becoming the boy for beating for the USA is
not very attractive prospect. They need to coordinate the response with China, because other then
via China they have almost no access to many technologies that originated in the West. West still
holds tremendous technological superiority in many key areas.
While equalizing staff of the US and Russian embassies is not a bad reaction on Obama provocation,
it is important to understand that countermeasures is what the US policymakers expect to start the
spiral of tightening economic screws on Russia.
But in no way it is easy or may be even prudent for Russia to try to quickly switch from Western
financial system to something else. And Russia track record does not inspire too much confidence.
They were first hit in 2014. They have several years to introduce the domestic credit card and it
looks like they did almost nothing. https://www.rbth.com/business/2015/04/02/visa_and_mastercard_join_russias_national_card_payment_system_44955.html
So the Chinese card is the only viable replacement for Mastercard/Visa in Russia https://www.rt.com/business/180696-china-russia-union-pay/
Similarly it would be cost-efficient to show US auditors like Price-Waterhouse-Cooper, KPMG,
Deloitte, and like the door, but then what?
http://aaajournals.org/doi/10.2308/bria-10175?code=aaan-site
|
|
Switchboard | ||||
| Latest | |||||
| Past week | |||||
| Past month | |||||
 |
 |
 |
Jul 31, 2017 | www.strategic-culture.org
EDITORIAL | 28.07.2017US Senate has voted on the bill containing a package of sanctions against Russia, Iran and North Korea. The senators have taken on great responsibility because Moscow is not going to watch the hostile action idly, it will respond. The retaliatory measures will be felt.
As Russia's Foreign Ministry announced on July 28, the decision has been taken to seize the Serebryany Bor diplomatic compound in north-west Moscow as well as the embassy's warehouse in a tit-for-tat move. A total of 35 diplomats will be sent home. The embassy staff must be reduced to 455 – the level of Russia embassy staff in Washington.
If President Trump signs the bill into law, it'll be hard to imagine Moscow cooperating with the US in the UN Security Council on the draft resolution sanctions to punish North Korea. Washington may need the Russia's support badly pretty soon.
The US space research programs will suffer a severe blow deprived of Russia RD-180 and RD-181 rocket engines they so much depend on. NASA's Atlas 5 rocket launches will be suspended.
- The export portfolio of JSC Techsnabexport (TENEX) includes 25 contracts with a total value of about $6.5 billion concluded with 19 US companies with the supply perspectives until 2028. The volume of the agreed supplies of Russian uranium products (that is 20% of annual reactor needs at the US nuclear power plants) is 95% used. There are few actors on the world market who could substitute the Russian supplies and it takes time and effort to make new deals, if it possible at all.
- VSMPO-AVISMA is the world's largest manufacturer of titanium products and the Russian supplier of titanium to Boeing and other US aerospace companies. It accounts for about a half of all titanium imported by the United States and over a third (35%) of titanium consumed by Boeing. The American company has investments in Russia. It has been in the country for decades. About five years ago, it announced plans to invest $27 billion over the next 30 years. In 2014, VSMPO and Boeing had signed an extension of the supply contract for titanium sheet to 2022.
- VSMPO-AVISMA has no competitors in the world and can easily find other customers. The US partners will face a very serious problem unable to find an alternative. The suspension of titanium supplies from Russia would damage the US defense industry capabilities.
American companies operating in Russia could be targeted. They risk suffering heavy losses , especially energy giants and banking conglomerates. For instance, Caterpillar could lose orders for heavy equipment needed to build pipelines and other construction projects. US high-tech companies may be prevented from working with Russian counterparts – something they are interested in.
The issue fits into a larger geopolitical pattern. The EU reaction makes it a pro-Russian bill, pushing Europe away from the United States to Russia. Europeans get more evidence to see that Washington's high-fallutin' harangues about Atlantic solidarity are the way to promote its selfish interests. The differences between the United States and the EU undermine the G7's unity regarding Russia. The countries agreed on the link between the Minsk accords and the sanctions. Now the US is going unilateral, provoking Europeans into continuing with the North Stream 2 project to defy America and, thus, benefit Russia. According to Europeans, "America First" should not be a synonym for "Europe second" or "Europe irrelevant".
According to Wolfgang Ischinger, chairman of the Munich Security Conference, this bill "will not achieve its objectives and will instead cause new problems. Unless it undergoes significant revision, it would compromise European energy security and damage US relations with Europe. The beneficiary of such an outcome would be Russia". According to Ischinger, the North Stream-2 issue "is not a question that should be decided in Washington. It is a European issue, to be decided by Europeans based on European law and regulation". The expert believes that signed into law, the legislation would "tip the scales in favor of those who want to end Europe's participation in the existing trans-Atlantic policy approach on Russia, including the sanctions regime. If the president signs the bill in its current form, it would alienate America's important complicating our alliance at a critical moment".
So, in an effort to strike Russia the US Congress has targeted Europe and NATO solidarity.
The fraying US-Russia ties will entail fraying arms control relationship. The "Russia sanctions bill" is not the only legislation expected to become law if Presidents Trump signs it. The proposed defense budget for 2018 has taken aim at the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, as well as the Open Skies and even New START treaties. Becoming law, it would deal a major blow to the US-Russia arms-control architecture. Russia would have no choice but respond. This would lead to arms race. If the US provokes the termination of the INF Treaty, it will greatly spoil its relations with the European allies. Is it wise to develop an intermediate range missile nobody wants on its soil?
President Trump has also ordered a major review of US nuclear policy, a common move by new administrations. The mission is impossible without making clear if the US has arms control arguments with Russia in force or not. No clarity on the issue would greatly complicate military planning in general.
Russia can and will deal a heavy blow in response to the US "sanctions bill". Unlike Iran or North Korea, it can do it. This ability should not be underestimated by the president who intends to sign the bill into law. Too many times have US experts and lawmakers made calculations about how much the measures will hurt Russia without assessing the damage America will inflict on itself.
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2017 | nationalinterest.org
The Russia-sanctions train appears to be accelerating out of the congressional station, which makes it highly unlikely that both chambers of the Legislative Branch will want to revisit its provisions, especially when escape from Washington's heat beckons with the forthcoming summer recess. Nevertheless, it behooves members of Congress, if they are determined to continue with this course of action (and the absolute majorities voting in favor of different versions of the sanctions in both the House of Representatives and Senate, far above the number needed to override any possible presidential veto), to take a pause and consider some changes.
Radical Pragmatist , July 29, 2017 8:54 AM
DmitryVedeneev , July 28, 2017 10:02 AMAgree. This is the same open-ended congressional stupidity as the AUMF, (unbounded perpetual war).
Russia will NEVER cede back Crimea. In that context, Congress has just baked in perpetuity Cold War II with Russia. And Trump with his feckless stupidity is all in. At a time when the obsolescent and unaffordable America as Global Cop model is unwinding.
Stick a fork in America - because it's cooked...
I've spent my entire post Soviet life believing the Jackson Vanik amendment was a hamhanded - quite literally imperialist - geopolitical tool and statement.
So when Putin's government announced the Magnitsky Act as nothing more than a natural continuation of a US desire to wage economic warfare outside the constraints of, say, the WTO treaties it is signatory to, I agreed.
Is this more of the same? That seems a statistical probability.
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2017 | russia-insider.com
The Real Reason for Sanctions? Stubborn Russia Won't Surrender Its SovereigntyRegime change may not be the main aim of US sanctions against Russia!but it certainly fits the pattern Paul Goncharoff 10
In the 20th century, the use of sanctions as punitive policy became more and more popular. Franklin Roosevelt tried sanctions on Japan in 1940. Dwight Eisenhower imposed them on Britain (Suez) in 1956. Jimmy Carter smacked them on the Soviet Union after its invasion (by invitation) of Afghanistan in 1980 with a wheat embargo and an Olympic boycott. Reagan used them to protest martial law in Poland. Congress also began to see the ease of using sanctions as a cheap way of expressing a hissy fit. In 1996, for example, Belize, Colombia, Costa Rica, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Panama, Vanuatu and Venezuela all were sanctioned to one or another degree by the US for their historic relations with whales and/or dolphins. All told, it is estimated that sanctions were used in less than 25 instances during the 20 th century. Since then America has imposed more than 80 new sanctions on foreign independent, sovereign countries.
Sanctions make for headlines that show political "action", they have a feel-good aura and allow politicians to feel they are being seen and headlined as doing something. Sanctions are less wimpy than word spanking an ambassador and less gory than sending in the marines. They afford immediate satisfaction of work in progress, despite the annoying details of collateral damage. The alleged Russian violations of international norms resulted in a sanctions regime progressively imposed upon Russia. However, various legal and political scholars regard sanction regimes as basic material coercion and therefore irreconcilable with international law.
Regime change may not be the main aim of sanctions, or the norm, although it seems to fit the pattern. The morality of punishing the citizens of a foreign sovereign nation is worth a thought. It seems a kinky way to win hearts and minds. No wonder that sanctions, especially unilaterally imposed ones like America's long standing on again – off again ban on trade with Cuba, Libya, Iran, or amped up sanctions against Russia might also understandably cause friction among one's own allies.
Under current sanctions the export value from Russia to the United States for the first 5 months of 2017 amounted to $3.9 billion, while import value for the same period was $4.8 billion, a negative trade balance for Russia. The total volume of trade between Russia and the United States has been declining since 2014. In 2016, the total volume amounted to $19.9 billion, which is a drop from $29.1 billion in 2014. The 28-country EU during this same period recorded its greatest increase of trade with Russia, which overtook Switzerland as the third main source of imports for the EU. Despite western economic sanctions imposed after Crimea voted to integrate with the Russian Federation, EU exports to Russia grew 24.6 percent between January and May, driven by manufactured goods and machinery, while imports, composed principally of oil and gas, surged by 37.6 percent. This illustrates that change too is reality; perceptions and assessments move on and develop. Perceptions within the EU have certainly moved on from the emotional propaganda of 2014, to a more realistic view of what is happening in Ukraine today. It would be common sense if some thought were given right from the start to defining a clear mechanism for ending sanctions; they are easier to impose than to lift, and the sanctioned regime is unlikely to make even small concessions if these are not greeted with some quid pro quo. In any event, after years of ritual sanctioning for example the decade's long 'Jackson-Vannick' cork. Eventually fatigue sets in and the sanctioned state of affairs becomes the new normal. It can even be ended, then re-branded, say to 'Magnitsky' yet the band plays on.
The fashion today is "smart" sanctions, which try to isolate and hurt the elites of a country and not the collateralized populations. This is most often viewed by their citizenry as an insult to their nation and tends to raise a consolidating grass roots patriotic response irrespective of their brand of democratic flavor.
It is troubling that those who support and impose sanctions offer only the vaguest explanations of how they expect the imposition of economic pain to result in political gain. If one recalls the 1990's and Iraq when Western ambassadors declared that sanctions should aim to harm the Iraqi population thereby forcing Saddam Hussein to heel. At that time the then US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said that 500,000 children's deaths were 'worth it'. Excepting for the fact that this humanitarian disaster due to sanctions and its collateral damage did not unseat the Iraqi regime as envisioned. The ensuing 'smart' war did.
By dreaming up and using "smart" or "targeted" sanctions as ways to affect those perceived as directly responsible for disagreeing with the current status-quo, or today's flavor of what is 'normal' usually involve financial restrictions, travel bans and other inconveniences targeted at a few dozen to a few hundred individuals, companies or government entities. While it may sound like it could work, it is equally naïve. It assumes that target governments are driven entirely by the preferences of a small cabal of individuals, and that messing with their lifestyle perquisites will result in policy change. This is patently absurd, and in spite of MSM reports that may differ, even governments of an authoritarian lean are based on coalitions of social and political forces – which are often extremely broad, and shape what those governments can and cannot do.
High time a realistic assessment is made as to the quite limited capacities, not to mention legalities of engineering social and political outcomes in other sovereign governments. We need to fully appreciate the coalitions underpinning existing sovereign governments and those who are promoting alternatives to elected governments before embarking merrily on regime-change plots. It makes sense to consider how sanctions will affect these different groups and the conflicts/struggles between them. We need to be able definitively make the case of how imposing economic pain is likely to lead to changes we expect are being looked for, and whether in fact such changes are in anyone's national, economic, cultural or humanitarian interests.
These very basic assessments unsurprisingly are not being made by any state or international organization currently deploying sanctions. Sanctions therefore are being imposed based on fuzzy wishful thinking and not on defined outcomes. Given the real and often severe damage inflicted on target societies, that is highly irresponsible, frequently counter-productive, not legally justifiable and, for a policy often justified by appealing to some brand of morality, is simply unethical.
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2017 | nationalinterest.org
The surprise about the Russian Foreign Ministry's announcement of Russian sanctions on U.S. diplomats and embassy properties is that they did not come sooner. The usual practice during the Cold War and after was that any diplomatic expulsion on either side was met with a symmetrical response. Indeed, in December, after the Obama administration expelled thirty-five Russian diplomats and closed down two embassy compounds to punish Russia for its interference in the 2016 election, Foreign Minister Lavrov appeared the next day on television brandishing a list of thirty-five American diplomats whom he advised President Putin to expel. But Putin surprised the world by announcing, "While we reserve the right to take reciprocal measures, we're not going to downgrade ourselves to the level of irresponsible 'kitchen' diplomacy." Clearly the Kremlin believed that once President Trump took office the sanctions would be rescinded and relations would improve, so why not be magnanimous?
...The downturn in relations is largely for domestic reasons on both sides. The incessant stream of investigations into ties between the U.S. president's family and close advisors and different Russian individuals!plus the 2016 election!has made Russia a toxic subject in Washington, DC. In an unusual alliance between congressional Republicans and Democrats, the Senate passed by 98–2 a bill codifying and expanding existing sanctions, which were initially imposed under Obama after the annexation of Crimea by executive order, because they want to remove from Trump the ability to lift these sanctions unilaterally. Congress would now have to approve any modification of the sanctions regime. This kind of legislation is a blunt instrument. Once passed, as the history of the 1974 Jackson-Vanik amendment shows (it remained in place for thirty-eight years), it will probably stay on the books for longer than necessary and remove the flexibility and leverage that a president could have in dealing with Russia.
Domestic factors have also influenced Russia's response. Russian nationalism has become a potent force. Putin faces re-election in March and, while his popularity remains high, his appeal rests largely on his foreign-policy accomplishments, showing that Russia is a respected world power and that he is a strong leader. The initial euphoria in some Russian circles that under Trump the Kremlin and the White House would enter into a new, friendly, pragmatic relationship, has evaporated. Putin may feel that he has to demonstrate that Russia cannot continue to respond passively to perceived insults from the United States...
...The U.S. sanctions bill, designed to hurt Russia, may have unintended consequences for the United States. As currently written, it will not only continue to penalize Russia but will also penalize American and European businesses because of its restrictions on energy projects that involve Russian companies. Specifically, the bill seeks to prevent the construction of the Nord Stream Two gas pipeline that would export Russian gas under the Baltic Sea to Europe. Germany supports the pipeline as the most cost-effective way to meet future gas demand, as do most,but certainly not all, of its EU partners. Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, has warned that the sanction bill "could have unintended unilateral effects that impact the EU's energy security interests." He added that "if our concerns are not taken into account sufficiently, we stand ready to act appropriately within a matter of days." Moreover, German officials, echoed by Russians, have suggested that real agenda behind the sanctions is to boost U.S. natural gas exports to Europe. Some EU officials have warned that the EU may rethink its own sanctions regime, carefully designed with the Obama administration, if the United States moves forward with the bill. This, of course, would be good news for the Kremlin.
Angela Stent directs the Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies at Georgetown University and is the author of The Limits of Partnership: U.S-Russian Relations in the Twenty-First Century .
Mr Russian, July 29, 2017 12:41 AM
Willem Post -> Mr Russian, July 29, 2017 9:25 AM"The irony, of course, is that Russia has brought this upon itself through its actions in Ukraine and during the U.S. election campaign."
The irony is that the author does not see (or pretends not to see) that the US does the same thing (and even worse).Let's see: "Hussein must go", "Gaddafi must go". Now "Assad must go". That is very much influencing the election and putting pressure on leaders of independent country, which is illegal, according to international law. I'm not even gonna count how many countries were bombed "in the name of democracy", which is also illegal. The fact that the US has the UN in their pocket does not mean it's gonna be forever.
Serbian American, July 29, 2017 5:56 PMMr. Russian,
Exactly correct. How many times did the US interfere by installing friendly Juntas, in south and middle America? Several dozen times? The various "Color Revolutions" financed with US money to add former soviet states the EU/US/NATO orbit, so the EU could sell goods and services to them instead of Russia, and so NATO could supply them with arms instead of Russia?
Color revolutions in Ukraine in 1990, and 2014? Scores of CIA/FBI agents in Kiev aiding to violently oust a democratically elected president in 2014; he had to flee for his life.
Russia peacefully annexed Crimea AFTER the vast majority of the Crimean population voted for it, including many Ukrainians and some Tartars living in Crimea; population 65% ethnic Russian, 25% Ukrainian, 10% Tartar.
The CIA installing the Shah in Iran?
Michael DeStefano -> Serbian American, July 30, 2017 12:00 AMEvery time we (USA) do something based on lies and propaganda is a good news for Russia. Which is exactly how every time Soviet Union did something based on lies and propaganda was a good news for USA.
Also, how funny ... most of establishment politicians in USA keep pointing out a Russian "annexation" of Crimea. Yet, none of them have any problem with Bill Clinton using military force, bombing Yugoslavia for 70 days and recognizing independence of Kosovo. Let me just remind you which laws and chapters BiIl Clinton violated: USA Constitution, NATO chapter, Helsinki agreement, War Powers resolution ...
Robert Gowland -> Serbian American, July 29, 2017 6:11 PM....and UN Res. 1244 but that was just a convenience to wipe the egg off of Clinton's face on day 78, AFTER he himself insisted on pushing it through.
...and on that note, isn't it interesting that Minsk II itself was incorporated by unanimous Security Council vote into UNSC Resolution 2202, yet the US speaks so casually about tossing it to the winds to placate Ukraine, after it itself voted for it and after it understood that Ukraine will never comply.
The US uses UN resolutions like a street pimp uses 15 year old runaways ,
Donald Fbulu, July 28, 2017 10:51 PMWell, once Russia starts writing larger checks than Riyadh is writing today the US politicians will suddenly "discover a discrepancy" - until then we'll have a (unjust) status quo. "FOLLOW THE MONEY"!
Politolog Externista -> Donald Fbulu, July 29, 2017 7:07 PMActually there are 1700 american diplomatic stuff in Russia and the stuff will be cut to 455. This is more like 73 per cent reduction not 60 per cent mentioned in the article. Moreover this is roughly the percentage of US diplomatic personnel spying on Russia or trying to influence Russian election.
TheOtherDonald -> Guest, July 29, 2017 9:42 AMmurrican hypocrisy knows no bounds. Whatever they accuse others of they do worse, but there is no proof their accusations have any factual basis, only hoping that 100 times repeated lie becomes fact. USA the nazi-like empire, where facts don't matter as much as wishful thinking.
Namey McName -> Guest, July 28, 2017 10:35 PMGood post, and most of what you said is true. The real reason for all this is to increase American exports of LNG. But LNG costs a lot more which drives up the price of everything made in Europe. And by forcing Russia to export more gas to China, the US reduces the cost of energy to China. So now Europe is at even more of a disadvantage vs Chinese manufacturing. Basically this is a Lose-Lose-Lose situation for Europe.
Duendao Namey -> McName, July 29, 2017 12:50 AMKnock yourself out, Boris. You may see yourself in competition with the US, but there really is no competition. You will return to the failed Soviet policies, and we will continue to advance.
TheOtherDonald -> Duendao, July 29, 2017 9:44 AMThe only thing that advances in US Is the trillions of it's debt.
siberiankitten -> TheOtherDonald, July 29, 2017 9:04 PMAnd our debt is already so large that we cannot even pay the interest on it if interest rates were to rise to what they were in the Jimmy Carter Administration. We are a failed nation unless we can keep interest rates low.
Namey McName -> Duendao, July 29, 2017 4:23 PM30 year Treasuries yield indicates that the market is not freakinf out. And under the current interest rates servicing the debt is cheaper than under Reagan
Allan -> Namey McName, July 29, 2017 7:29 PMSo, who cares if the debt is rising, and how do you think that it harms the US?
Namey McName -> Allan, July 30, 2017 2:23 AMYou will care, among every one else who lives in the USofA. Once the US loses its dollar as the international trading currency, it will actually have to earn the monies used to purchase foreign goods. Now it is being printed out of thin air. Once that happens, inflation will skyrocket, severally taking down the US economy. Only a matter of time...
Allan -> Namey McName, July 30, 2017 11:17 AMIt has been printed out of air since 1972. Most transactions are denominated in it because this nation has been politically stable for much of its existence. If we collapse everyone collapses.
That debt out there keeps the world under control. It is the greenback in your pocket, but it's not worth anything. Every currency traded on the open market works the same way. What matter is debt to GDP, and ours is fairly low still. Japan has ten times the debt to GDP ratio. The yen is still worth money.
Mr Russian -> Namey McName, July 29, 2017 12:19 AMCertainly, we have been printing money for a long time. Other nations could not get away with such practices as hyper inflation would surely follow. The fact that the US controls the IMF, World Bank and, pretty much the world's money supply, allows us to set the interest rates to artificially ridiculously low levels in order to service our outstanding debt levels with minimum costs. If/when the US dollar loses its special status to a basket of international currencies we'll lose our ability to set conditions for the world financial markets.
That is why the emerging Chinese-led BRICS banking system appears to be a deadly threat to the US economy and, in turn, to its world hegemony.
Just this week CIA head, Mike Pompeo, declared China as the #1 threat to the US. When asked, he further indicated that it was the Chinese economic progress that threatened the US. Christine Legarde, head of IMF, backed this up by predicting that the IMF could move to Bejing within 5 years. The writings are on the wall....
Michael DeStefano -> Namey McName, July 29, 2017 9:48 AMJohnny-boy, according to American MSM Russia quite easily outmaneuvers CIA and FBI cyber-security and gets to decide who becomes the President of the United States. Isn't it why the Congress passed the sanctions?
Also Russia is the best supplier of natural gas to the EU. In fact it's so good that the Congress tries to use dirty tricks that might delay Nord Stream 2 pipeline.
You are right the US is in no position to compete with Russia, hence the hysteria in American establishment.Michael DeStefano, July 29, 2017 12:19 AMIntelligent talking points met with sophomoric cookie cutter drivel. That's the extent of your understanding of the universe I'm afraid.
It's the US and most specifically, the neocon PNAC-positive subculture and its unwitting supporters, that cannot tolerate an independent Russia (or any country of consequence for that matter) and resorts to any and all tools in its toolkit to assuage its intolerance, coup d'etats, election-meddling, blatant propaganda, sparking and fueling wars, civil and otherwise, endless sanctions (the kid sister to embargoes which are acts of war).
You reap what you sow, kiddo. No excuses. Problem is, they drag most Americans into it with no true understanding of their motives or the consequences. It's THEY who should be sanctioned. Quarantined, even better.
The Arioch -> Michael DeStefano, July 29, 2017 11:28 AMThe irony, dear author, is...that the US, just as it did in Syria by arming salafist jihadis to pressure Assad to step down and turned Syria into a nightmare, it fomented, backed, trained and financed the European banderite-fascist equivalent of Middle Eastern salafist jihadis to overthrow a duly-elected, OSCE sanctioned president and instead of insisting new elections occur in six months time as the EU had so laboriously negotiated, subverted democracy in the name of hegemonic dreams, shot itself in the foot, slipped in its own poo, hoisted itself by its own petard, singlehandedly resurrected the cold war and worse and still can't come to grips with its own culpability in it all.
THAT madam, is the irony of it all.
Michael DeStefano The Arioch, July 30, 2017 12:58 AMGive the author some slack. Would she fail to repeat the mandatory russophobic Credo - her article would be censored in any politically approved media. She knows she is lying, it is just a required ticked to be printed in NI or any American media
Michael DeStefano Namey McName, July 30, 2017 2:06 AMThat's entirely true. Woe is the state of journalism today. Big Brother or one of his other brothers watches over them all.
Politolog Externista Namey McName, July 29, 2017 7:00 PMAsk Sessions. I suppose he should just emulate the democrats and their neocon cohorts by building cases on innuendo and speculation provided by a coterie of 'anonymous sources' and no proof of consequence and have their faithful media editors redact any news to the contrary.
A free press does not mean the freedom to press your agenda by any and all means available, in case you weren't aware.
I regret that I have to give you rudimentary lessons in civics but apparently, someone has to.
The Arioch -> Namey McName, July 29, 2017 11:48 AMMessing in your politics ? You were supposed to vote in Hitlery and you got Trump. These politicians mean that meddling is having RT and Sputnik in English so you can form an opinion different than ordained by the deep state oligarchy. They want to punish you for not having Hitlery as president. It is very disturbing when a warmoínger, mass murderer, friend of now slain Al-Baghdadi who is photographed with McCain is somehow a positive person. USA is trying to meddle in politics of each country because they think might makes right. If EU peoples throw your NATO out and become independent, no more US vassals, seeking their own interests not US first EU last, because USA is the land of evil and of corruption to the bone. Your evil drives sane people from you. The wicked love you, the sane are disgusted. Nobody likes imperialist yanks. Nobody likes their terrorist friends. No Obama or Trump or swamp.
Mark Thomason, July 30, 2017 11:34 AMThe million barrels question is how prevent american messing in the rest of the world's politics and elections... Which punishment to DC regime would be enough to bring freedom to the world?
enoch arden -> Mark Thomason, July 30, 2017 4:31 PMThe US Embargo Act of 1807 did great damage to Northeast shipping interests, and commerce more generally. However, it became a huge boost to Northeast manufacturing interests. The US economy diversified, and new businesses were established to do what had been imported. Prices were higher at first, and quality was down at first, but the Embargo Act effectively protected the start up of the US post-colonial economy.
Western experts have long maintained that Russia needs to diversify its economy, away from exports of oil, gas, and raw materials, into the sort of manufacturing that would displace imports. That is harder for Putin to control and loot, and generally a lot harder to do than Putin's political machine has been able to do.
Now we are in effect giving them that. We've imposed on them their Embargo Act advantage, and are forcing them to do what we know they should do to be stronger against us.
This may hurt them in the short term, but it will hurt us in the long term, and we've been saying this for a long time now.
Wyrdless -> Karol Czenko, July 29, 2017 2:20 PMQuite true. The Russian farmers are going to erect a statue of Obama for the sanctions which greatly boosted the Russian agriculture by restricting import. The same effect will be on the industrial production. The only class in Russia who will lose on that are the local Compradors doing business on import and promoting the foreign control over the Russian market,
Che Lemur -> Karol Czenko, July 29, 2017 7:55 PMThe poles just opened a new LNG terminal to import US LNG.
They want options and i imagine know what it's like more than most to be under Russian influence
reminder the West backed the infinitely more corrupt Yeltsin regime in the nineties, which was basically a get rich quick scheme for Russian jews (OY VEY ANTI-SEMITISM ALERT).
America ultimately does not care about corruption (Washington is incredibly corrupt - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ ... - there are plenty of allies like Columbia, Turkey, Pakistan, etc where every evil Russia is accused of finds even greater expression. Washington does not care about 'unilateral border changes' either, since it unilaterally changed the borders of Yugoslavia and her successor states for geopolitical advantage, tolerates NATO ally Turkey meddling in Cyprus and Syria, illegally occupies Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, illegally invaded Iraq, and protects Israeli land grabs in the Golan and so on.
Russian corruption and foreign policy is a 'problem' for neocon trolls like Karol because Russia is sovereign, unlike the tame regimes that run Western Europe. A political elite at odds with Washington is intolerable for the Globo-homo Internationale. ..
The rule of law and corruption have consistently improved under Putin, who reformed an oligarchic state into a illiberal democracy WITH corruption problems (understandable after 70 years of Soviet mismanagement and a decade of robber baron capitalism - eliminating social habits takes time). The worst nightmare for the US is actually a Russia free of corruption.
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2017 | www.nytimes.com
Putin, Responding to Sanctions, Expels 755 U.S. Diplomats - The New York Times By NEIL MacFARQUHARJ
MOSCOW - President Vladimir V. Putin announced on Sunday that 755 American diplomats would be expelled from Russia by Sept. 1
... ... ...
Speaking in a television interview on the Rossiya 1 network, Mr. Putin said that Russia's patience in waiting for improved relations with the United States had worn out.
"We waited for quite some time that maybe something will change for the better, had such hope that the situation will somehow change, but, judging by everything, if it changes, it will not be soon,"
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2017 | marknesop.wordpress.com
Cortes , July 29, 2017 at 3:00 pm
Diane Johnstone peels back the way the sanctions applied by the USA are likely to be the suicide note for the USD as reserve currency: https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/07/28/collateral-damage-u-s-sanctions-aimed-at-russia-strike-western-european-allies/marknesop , July 29, 2017 at 9:04 pmThanks so much for that! I seem to have revealed my ignorance by asking rhetorically, earlier; "Why don't countries ordered to pay huge fines to the USA simply tell Uncle Sam to ram it up his chuff, sideways?" After all, the USA has no authority to find the financial institutions of other sovereign nations guilty of corruption, and order them to pay huge fines to the United States – it's highway robbery. But now we get down to the nub of it – because of the dollar's status as international reserve currency.yalensis , July 30, 2017 at 5:28 amI have been saying for years that it is time for the world to dump the dollar as reserve currency, and maybe this time it will really happen. Oh, just as the reserve currency – the dollar will likely always be reserve currency, owing to the global importance of the American economy. But at present other countries have no currency to flee to when Uncle Sam starts flinging his balls about. The dollar should be only one of a basket of reserve currencies of equal status, and we might see the Chinese making overtures to boost the global valuation of the yuan, although there are good reasons why it will probably not replace the dollar in our lifetimes. No reason countries should be left without a choice, though – isn't America forever blathering on about choices and how it means freedom if you have them?
I know only nuts advance the possibility of a return to the gold standard, but I have to say it would make the world sit up and take notice if China and Russia united in a currency union backed by gold. Because although the United States is supposed to have the world's biggest gold reserves, I think many share my belief that that is all just on paper, and they really don't have more than a quarter what they say they have, perhaps less. They certainly go out of their way to squash any country which proposes trading in gold, as they did Libya and Iraq. Well, Iraq's crime was more a state-led drive to dump the greenback than it was a shift to gold, but it seemed to have the same effect.
A large-volume global sell-off of American dollars would put Washington in a very difficult position indeed. A popular move to a gold-backed currency would drop the bottom out of a fiat currency like the greenback.
To quote that great American patriot, William Jennings Bryan:
"We shall crucify the bankers upon a cross of gold!"
|
|
|
Jul 30, 2017 | www.usatoday.com
Whatever you think of Putin or Trump, they're presidents of nuclear superpowers: Opposing viewThe drive to put more sanctions on Russia might feel good. But fueling a new Cold War can only propel the United States in the wrong direction. It's time to turn away from a collision course, not step on the gas.
Whatever you think of Vladimir Putin, or Donald Trump, for that matter, they are the presidents of the world's nuclear superpowers. Piling sanctions on Russia means escalating tensions. And that's extremely dangerous.
When this year began, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists moved its risk-estimate Doomsday Clock closer to apocalyptic midnight than at any time since 1953. "The probability of global catastrophe is very high, and the actions needed to reduce the risks of disaster must be taken very soon," the Bulletin 's expert panel warned.
If new sanctions target Russia, the predictable results will include angry responses from the Kremlin and more polarized attitudes in both countries ! damaging the prospects for any détente while boosting a spiral of mutual hostility.
Democratic lawmakers rightly deride Republicans for their "climate change denial," but both parties are locked into a kind of "nuclear war denial" in relation to Russia. The latest sanctions bill is part of an obsession with denouncing Russia that leaves scant room for considering how to reduce the dangers of nuclear war between the two countries.
