6 ms·

This goes to show how inept and inconsistent western leadership has become in terms of policies. Not so long ago, “sanctions don’t work” was the mantra of the p

This goes to show how inept and inconsistent western leadership has become in terms of policies. Not so long ago, “sanctions don’t work” was the mantra of the political class and Wall Street when there was a trade war with China. And now those same people argued for the most ludicrous types of sanctions that actually hurt their legitimacy long term. Why would countries with emerging market economies hold their reserves in UST and USD when it can be seized without due process? Rule of law was the last thing west has and the leadership across the board are going out of their ways to destroy its legitimacy. Another worrying symptom in much of the western democracy is how the court system is becoming complicit in all this. When individuals of Russian origins were getting their assets seized with no due process whatsoever , where was the court system in this? I have no sympathy for Russian oligarchs but law should apply for everyone equally. These types of blanket seize gives state powers to set the precedent which in the future they can apply against anyone. Canada already did this to their own people.

Nevermark 4y ago
I doubt that the US, working closely with many other countries, in opposition to an invasion, will move that needle much. But sanctions for lesser evils, sanctions taken more unilaterally, and sanction changes triggered by the revolving door of US politicians & parties, have given many countries heartburn.
lostmsu 4y ago
Frankly, you are just repeating Russian propaganda here. Pretty much nobody in the world cares about US seizing Russian USD because nobody important is planning a full scale invasion into a neighboring country. I bet you if the UN could vote on that, seizure would be approved almost unanimously.
- ghufran_syed 4y ago
  Does that matter if it’s true? Or should we not consider the possible truth of it because we don’t listen to the “unbelievers”
  - lostmsu 4y ago
    I mean, is there any indication to the contrary apart from various "economist opinions"? Has anyone dumped dollar reserves since the seizure? Anyone switched to alternative currencies apart from few deals with Russia?
- bigger_inside 4y ago
  - lostmsu 4y ago
    Go ahead and continue waiting.
  - cannabis_sam 4y ago
  - inawarminister 4y ago
    Only after US is surpassed as a hegemon would its errors be punished under international law. That would be a very different environment, but we can actually picture it now. The clock is ticking.
- pasabagi 4y ago
  > nobody in the world cares about US seizing Russian USD It's a sovereignty issue. Countries don't like to give other countries substantial leverage over them if it's possible to avoid it. That said, I think the seizures are probably fine, just because there's no real alternative to the USD or EUR as a reserve currency. Doing anything beyond that (spending the frozen funds, for instance) would probably not be fine.
- kkfx 4y ago
  Frankly you are completely wrong: having touched private property, having violated funding principles of western values have only a meaning: the west can't be trusted. On contrary the fact that both Russia and China have talked stability that means they do their own interests like anyone else, but they are less unreliable than the west. Western neoliberals have done so much damage to us westerner that we MUST jail them for life for crimes not different than the original nazi ones who happen to be payed effectively by the same cohort of people who rule us today, their crimes are much worse against us than those from others blocks at their own homes and neighborhoods. Personally as an EU Citizen I have exactly ZERO trust in anything coming from neoliberals, especially from "English world" right now, and I'm not alone seeing the autarchic trend ongoing at any level, from States who try to reshoring to private people who look for as much autonomy as they can. That's in our terms have a name: high treason. Where civil servants act against their own people for saving/favoring a small cohort of rulers. It's nothing new of course, it happen every time in the history but that's is from the point of view of our Democratic values.
  - rich_sasha 4y ago
    What exactly are the principles violated? Confiscation and freezing of assets are standard and necessary tools in crime fighting in the West. To freeze assets, rather than confiscate for good, you typically only need a substantial suspicion of a crime, not a court order - which again is necessary. This here is very similar. It is beyond doubt that Russia invaded a peaceful neighbour, likely it is committing atrocities. Various international courts are investigating these atrocities, with full legal process. The only immediate forum that could sanction Russia is the UN where Russia has a veto, and a massive majority of UN members, by count, population and GDP, condemned Russia in a separate resolution. These sanctions also didn’t come out of nowhere. Russia was warned as nauseam that the will come if Russia will invade. And they came gradually, giving Russia a chance to back off. Any country evaluating whether they are at risk of sanctions has to answer to itself: will I be pig-headedly invading a NATO partner with no regard for human rights and due diplomatic process after being repeatedly warned to not do so, and against a massive majority of UN members? If yes, hmm well better store reserves in crypto. Or CNY - China surely wouldn’t use their currency as leverage. The only law under which these sanctions look questionable is the Russian one: I see, I take, none of your business.
nitwit005 4y ago
Much of the "sanctions don't work" was looking back at the relatively toothless sanctions put in place before. The new sanctions are hardly toothless.
- rich_sasha 4y ago
  Furthermore, the post-2014 sanctions did actually bite quite hard. They weren’t designed to obliterate, rather to discourage further action. And they would have done, had Russia acted reasonably.
  - olsonjeffery 4y ago
    So the sanctions would of worked, except that they didn’t?
    - rich_sasha 4y ago
      They worked as an incentive to not continue. Russia insisted in shooting itself in the foot.
    - lttlrck 4y ago
      Sanctions are a tool of persuasion. Sometimes persuasion doesn't work?

Nevermark 4y ago

I doubt that the US, working closely with many other countries, in opposition to an invasion, will move that needle much. But sanctions for lesser evils, sanctions taken more unilaterally, and sanction changes triggered by the revolving door of US politicians & parties, have given many countries heartburn.

lostmsu 4y ago

Frankly, you are just repeating Russian propaganda here. Pretty much nobody in the world cares about US seizing Russian USD because nobody important is planning a full scale invasion into a neighboring country. I bet you if the UN could vote on that, seizure would be approved almost unanimously.

ghufran_syed 4y ago
Does that matter if it’s true? Or should we not consider the possible truth of it because we don’t listen to the “unbelievers”
- lostmsu 4y ago
  I mean, is there any indication to the contrary apart from various "economist opinions"? Has anyone dumped dollar reserves since the seizure? Anyone switched to alternative currencies apart from few deals with Russia?
bigger_inside 4y ago
- lostmsu 4y ago
  Go ahead and continue waiting.
- cannabis_sam 4y ago
- inawarminister 4y ago
  Only after US is surpassed as a hegemon would its errors be punished under international law. That would be a very different environment, but we can actually picture it now. The clock is ticking.
pasabagi 4y ago
> nobody in the world cares about US seizing Russian USD It's a sovereignty issue. Countries don't like to give other countries substantial leverage over them if it's possible to avoid it. That said, I think the seizures are probably fine, just because there's no real alternative to the USD or EUR as a reserve currency. Doing anything beyond that (spending the frozen funds, for instance) would probably not be fine.
kkfx 4y ago
Frankly you are completely wrong: having touched private property, having violated funding principles of western values have only a meaning: the west can't be trusted. On contrary the fact that both Russia and China have talked stability that means they do their own interests like anyone else, but they are less unreliable than the west. Western neoliberals have done so much damage to us westerner that we MUST jail them for life for crimes not different than the original nazi ones who happen to be payed effectively by the same cohort of people who rule us today, their crimes are much worse against us than those from others blocks at their own homes and neighborhoods. Personally as an EU Citizen I have exactly ZERO trust in anything coming from neoliberals, especially from "English world" right now, and I'm not alone seeing the autarchic trend ongoing at any level, from States who try to reshoring to private people who look for as much autonomy as they can. That's in our terms have a name: high treason. Where civil servants act against their own people for saving/favoring a small cohort of rulers. It's nothing new of course, it happen every time in the history but that's is from the point of view of our Democratic values.
- rich_sasha 4y ago
  What exactly are the principles violated? Confiscation and freezing of assets are standard and necessary tools in crime fighting in the West. To freeze assets, rather than confiscate for good, you typically only need a substantial suspicion of a crime, not a court order - which again is necessary. This here is very similar. It is beyond doubt that Russia invaded a peaceful neighbour, likely it is committing atrocities. Various international courts are investigating these atrocities, with full legal process. The only immediate forum that could sanction Russia is the UN where Russia has a veto, and a massive majority of UN members, by count, population and GDP, condemned Russia in a separate resolution. These sanctions also didn’t come out of nowhere. Russia was warned as nauseam that the will come if Russia will invade. And they came gradually, giving Russia a chance to back off. Any country evaluating whether they are at risk of sanctions has to answer to itself: will I be pig-headedly invading a NATO partner with no regard for human rights and due diplomatic process after being repeatedly warned to not do so, and against a massive majority of UN members? If yes, hmm well better store reserves in crypto. Or CNY - China surely wouldn’t use their currency as leverage. The only law under which these sanctions look questionable is the Russian one: I see, I take, none of your business.

nitwit005 4y ago

Much of the "sanctions don't work" was looking back at the relatively toothless sanctions put in place before. The new sanctions are hardly toothless.

rich_sasha 4y ago
Furthermore, the post-2014 sanctions did actually bite quite hard. They weren’t designed to obliterate, rather to discourage further action. And they would have done, had Russia acted reasonably.
- olsonjeffery 4y ago
  So the sanctions would of worked, except that they didn’t?
  - rich_sasha 4y ago
    They worked as an incentive to not continue. Russia insisted in shooting itself in the foot.
  - lttlrck 4y ago
    Sanctions are a tool of persuasion. Sometimes persuasion doesn't work?