Unprecedented US sanctions against Russia: little-known details, real challenges, the Kremlin's

Перевод статьи - Slav L

Прекрасная статья . Американцы, опять поставили себя в неловкое положение!

Voting on the draft law on the introduction of unprecedented anti-Russian sanctions is scheduled for the United States in the near future. However, long before this event the liberal press of Russia was systematically swept by a whole "tsunami" of defeatist moods, while the pro-American media on the contrary literally lashed out in loud talks about the imminent surrender of Moscow.

How dangerous are American sanctions really?

Is the US bill able to stop the construction of Russian gas pipelines? What are the details of the scandalous document that are not covered, and will Moscow be able to adequately respond to such a Russophobic step?

Background of the Question

Initially, the current document on the tightening of anti-Russian sanctions was considered by the Senate under the index "S.722" as early as June 2017. Then the amendment was called "sanctions against Iran," but it already carried a whole list of comprehensive measures that limit Russia. A month and a half later, the bill passed all the "reconciliations" that had arisen between the two chambers of Congress and by now has become the "Law on Counteracting Iran's Destabilizing Actions" in the world and the region. Moreover, in an astonishing way, and despite the full unambiguity in the title, out of the thirty-eight pages of the law "against Iran", thirty are occupied by the anti-Russian chapter "on countering the influence of Moscow in Europe and Eurasia."

Now, in case of its positive adoption, the bill will go to re-affirmation in the Senate, and then lie down on the table for final signing with the American president. Vetting of the anti-Russian document by Donald Tramp does not really change the situation, since the congressmen from both parties, both Republican and Democratic, have already come to a collective decision to approve this project in any case, and consequently the Congress will eventually overcome the presidential veto with a majority vote. The domestic political tasks of an unprecedented law International solutions of this scale have a huge populist significance and therefore news about them usually does not affect the very essence of the innovations introduced. Meanwhile, through the adoption of this bill, America's transnational elites losing the presidential election, in effect, are conducting a quiet administrative revolution and are successfully moving the levers of foreign policy decisions from the White House and the hands of the incumbent president to that institution in which they are still unconditional masters - to the Congress, the Senate and the House of Representatives. The essence of the "revolution" lies in the fact that most of the highest political functionaries of the United States live and build their careers in a recurring cycle of election cadences. They spend one term as congressman, senator or state representative, after taking a forced pause of six years, or two years depending on their position, and then, having worked out a "break" among university elites, or private international corporations, they begin a new round Pre-election "battles". New elections require new financial investments, and therefore with every new repetition the American establishment becomes more and more bogged down in a continuous dependence on the private organizations that finance it. High competition in the political field forces individual figures to be as useful to the sponsor, and soon leads to the fact that individual politicians not only adhere to one of the established political clans, but also to the fact that all these clans in general become deeply Engaged by those or other representatives of corporate elites. Congressmen, senators and many other American functionaries adhere to such an approach a priori, and therefore a priori depend on financial injections from the side, and since the traditional pension future for any US politician is the "sale" of the company's own ties as a full-time lobbyist, The Western corporations have enough control over the political system of America. Realizing this, it is not difficult to realize that the main task for transnational elites after their loss in the "battle" for the White House was not only blocking the opportunities of Donald Trump, but also transferring his maximum powers to those lower-level functionaries who are controlled by them as reliably as possible - to congressmen , State representatives and senators in the field. This is what the sanction document that is currently being adopted makes the national elites stand behind Donald Trump and his lion's share of foreign sovereignty. Now, Trump, who planned to establish bilateral relations with Moscow, will not be able to do this at least because the old sanctions regime based on five edicts of Barack Obama and which if necessary could be canceled by the same decrees by Trump himself, ceases to operate at least until a new election In the Congress. Under the new law, any actions to relax the sanctions measures will have to be justified by the American leader in a special report to the relevant committees of both chambers.That is, the US president is not simply deprived of the possibility of adopting a whole layer of independent foreign policy decisions, but also commits to "persuading" Congress to support his presidential position, while the latter, after 30 days of discussion, will make either an approving or rejecting proposal a joint resolution. And given the influence of transnational elites opposing Trumpu on existing congressmen, these resolutions will be guaranteed to be negative.

Relations with Russia

The new American sanctions project translates into the framework of the law absolutely all existing restrictive anti-Russian packages to date: "Crimean", "Donbass", "hacker", "Syrian", "human rights", and "energy". In addition, he ties "Donbass" sanctions to Moscow's implementation of the Minsk Agreements of 2015 and 2014, even though Russia is not legally their executive part. The last absurd innovation is made in order to "exchange Syria for the Donbass," hinted at in the American press, or other geopolitical concessions to our country were not legally possible for Trump. Exactly for the same purpose, "acts in support of Ukraine's sovereignty, integrity, democracy and economic stability", whose actions were previously "activated" at the discretion of the president, also become binding for him after the adoption of this bill.

Russian presidential elections

In the list of measures adopted by the bill, there appears a paragraph on the so-called "corrupt Russian figures trying to avoid American sanctions." And this section is openly aimed at thwarting the upcoming presidential elections in 2018. In essence, it forms representatives of Russian elites that have compromised themselves in the 1990s and a dense anti-presidential opposition. In particular, the document provides for the blocking of assets, accounts, the ban on entry to the United States for all individuals trying to circumvent sanctions through re-registration of companies to close relatives, and requires the President of America to provide the Congress with annual reports on those Russian oligarchs who "are close to the political regime »Of Russia. Speech in this case, of course, is about Vladimir Putin and those businessmen who previously agreed to the conditions of the Kremlin to get out of the shadows, currently carrying out large-scale investments in the Russian economy and its assets. In view of the last point, a section was added to the sanction bill, which introduces a restriction on private investments in excess of $ 10 million to such privatization transactions of Russian property that are carried out in the interests of state officials, their partners, or their closest relatives.

Pressure on the economy of the country

The sanctions project significantly expands and tightens sectoral sanctions against Moscow, extending them apart from the financial, oil and defense sectors to attract debt financing to gas, metallurgical and mining enterprises, to the energy and railway infrastructure. It is proposed to extend the limitation on debt financing to sovereign Russian Eurobonds, as well as to OFZ, which in principle may have painful consequences for the Russian foreign exchange market. The private issue of the return of Russian diplomatic property arrested by Obama can also be considered closed with the American side, and cooperation with Russian sanction companies due to fears of punitive American measures is even more "toxic."

Energy "wars"

In addition to the introduction of other restrictive measures, the draft sanctions specifically emphasize counteraction to the Nord Stream-2 pipeline, as well as the need to "prioritize the export of America's energy resources to create American jobs" in the country itself. For this purpose, the package provides for a shortening of the terms of lending to the oil and gas industry in Russia from 90 to 60 days, as well as a ban on participation in new oil and gas production projects in the deep waters, the Arctic shelf and in shale where the share of state companies is more than 33%. The reason for the latter, at the same time, lies in the cost of the Nord Stream-2 project, estimated at 9.5 billion euros, where 100% of the shareholder of Nord Stream 2 AG is the Russian Gazprom. Earlier, according to an agreement between Engie, OMV, Royal Dutch Shell Uniper, Wintershall, and the Russian company, it was understood that European investors would provide the project with 4.75 billion euros in long-term loans, and although now investments exceeded 1 billion, further financial transactions turn out to be Under a big question. All this is done by the US to create a deficit in the gas market in Europe, and the task is to squeeze out Russian gas, raise prices to a profitable US LNG at a competitive level and strike at one of the key items of the Russian economy's revenues.

What will Russia answer?

Russia has two actual methods for a possible full-fledged anti-American response. The first is symmetrical, for example, to stop cooperation in the space field with NASA having ceased to share the resources of Roskosmos, the import of Russian rocket engines and the holding of consultations. However, this step will undermine the revenue base of the Russian company itself, and will also force Washington to pour unprecedented financial flows into private space corporations, thereby increasing the industry competitor that Russia does not need. Also, we could symmetrically deny the United States the supplies of aluminum, titanium and molybdenum used in the production of Boeing, but in this case Moscow is too much interested in buying and maintaining the operating fleet of American aircraft, and will need them at least Before the serial introduction of their analogous boards. Russia could renounce contracts for the supply of Rosoboronexport, for example helicopter spare parts and digital equipment for servicing US-sold helicopters for Afghanistan. But in this case, the growth of terrorism in Central Asia promises the country not a few superfluous problems. In other words, a symmetrical answer is not a full-fledged decision, because in essence, Russia does not buy anything critical from America, and what it sells is beneficial to the development of its own economic system. The second counteraction approach is asymmetric, and in this context the United States is not in vain expecting a strike from the "unexpected side". In particular, Moscow is painless for itself, but it is sensitive for Washington to start cooperation in the space sphere with China. Beijing is going to build its space station and has already invited Russia to participate in the project, and a fruitful union and the result of such cooperation for the American side is truly critical. Also, multinational companies in America have views on Russian lands and joint development of energy resources, however, access to these facilities can be quickly blocked. There are other asymmetric steps, for example in the rare earth component and the IT industry, which are at least as effective as the consequences of the extremely successful product embargo on the EU. Europe in the matter of current sanctions, for a number of reasons, is also part of a successful asymmetric response for Russian diplomacy. First, the US bill imposes sanctions not only against our country, but also against those companies that are connected with Russia through the trade in raw materials, gas, metal and many other products. Secondly, the corporations falling under this list are European industry giants from Germany, Austria, Holland and other EU countries. Thirdly, Germany is approaching the next election and Merkel, as a promoter of industrial German elites, is unable to continue to ignore the interests of its own sponsors as before. And finally, fourthly, for the past three years since the introduction of sanctions, Germany alone has lost about three hundred thousand jobs from the Russian response measures, and the EU as a whole, more than one hundred billion full-weight dollars. Only in the first five months of 2017, the trade turnover between Russia and the EU began to grow rapidly, reaching a thirty percent level and $ 97.5 billion. Given the above, Europe, despite the geopolitical lack of autonomy, has something to lose, and therefore Brussels, along with the "locomotives" of the Eurozone, is actively looking for steps that can prevent the US anti-Russian sanctions measures to be executed on the territory of the European Union. Another asymmetric response may be a large-scale legal process initiated by Russia within the framework of the WTO organization. Since the unilateral measures taken by the American side violate literally all the norms of this authoritative international organization. Also, Trump during a month and a half of discussions with the Congress managed to soften the original version of the anti-Russian bill. Firstly, the US Treasury Secretary is now deprived of the opportunity to impose restrictions not only on the railway and metallurgical sector of Russia, but also on the shipping sector. Secondly, the timing of possible Western lending to Russian oil and gas companies has been reduced from 90 days to 60, and not to 30, as previously planned. And thirdly, the ban on the supply of American technologies will only concern new Russian oil and gas projects, and not those that have already been put into operation and are functioning successfully.

What impact will US sanctions have on the domestic situation in the country?

Strange as it may seem, in the current difficult conditions for the Russian Federation, new restrictive measures on the part of the United States could very well lead to the pluses that are extremely important for the national mentality. At a minimum, without further strengthening external pressures, Russia is unlikely to even at least begin to reconsider its traditional financial policy and unpromising economic liberal paradigm. After the introduction of new sanctions measures, this motivation will sharply appear in her. In particular, one of the points in the text of the US draft law provides for "restrictions on the operations of Russian financial institutions with US federal treasuries" and while Washington shows such a solution by a complete solution of Russia's total misunderstanding, considering this step a serious blow to the country's economy, for us it opens up fantastic prospects . Treasury bonds of the Federal Reserve of America are the most reliable debt instrument and they are really super liquid, but in our country, contrary to expectations of Americans, multibillion investments of state revenues into foreign economy, even taking into account the profits received from it, have long been a very popular decision. Now, thanks to Washington's monetary logic, this point gives Russia's leadership a good reason for reducing, refusing or completely withdrawing public investment from US debt securities, and does not leave a significant room for maneuver, which is opposed to this by all forces of the economic bloc and the Finance Ministry. Also, after the approval of the bill, the Russian elite will have no choice but to implement their future investments in the national economy, or to put an end to the Russian market and drop the pro-Russian masks to go into open opposition. For the liberal bloc, new sanctions also do not leave customary excuses for withdrawing all super profits from the sale of raw materials in favor of reserve funds. Now the "left wing" has a compelling need to spend some of the accumulated resources for the development of the economy of domestic consumption, as well as to replace foreign investments with its own, as the USA and China are actively doing. In view of the technological section of sanctions, the country also has no alternative but to raise its own branch specialists and speedily revive the aspect of fundamental education, ensuring high working conditions and wages, and the pace of import substitution. Plus, in the current situation, there is no other choice in the sphere of control of each budget ruble, and every transaction of banks and state companies, instead of the unconscious use of rain capitals on poorly structured corrupt industries.

On the whole, the expert on international trade who worked on anti-Russian sanctions in the US National Security Council, David Mortlock, who spoke publicly on the eve of the current adoption of anti-Russian measures, spoke in the best way about the scale of threats from the new American bill to Russia: "In the case of countries such as Iran, any new sanctions measure can really change the situation quite significantly. But Iran - although a fairly large economy, everything - is equally incomparable with Russia. And although the current US administration is trying to unilaterally sanction sanctions against Moscow, the reality is that the Russian economy is too strong and large to be seriously harmed by only unilateral American restrictions. "

Thus, Washington's sanctions, although unprecedented, are incredibly insolent, and very large, a radical threat to Russia are not. Much more important is how we will take advantage of the unique opportunity that has fallen out with their emergence, and how far we will be able to pass along the path of building a new, state - oriented national economy.

Ruslan Hubiev https://cont.ws/@barbera/672313