5 ms·

Current US sanctions on Russia make trade a moot point, that’s why.

nicce 2y ago
There is still more trade with Russia than many countries in the list. Even Syria and Iran got tariffs.
tashbarg 2y ago
Total trade with Russia in 2024: $3.5bn Total trade with Ukraine in 2024: $2.9bn https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/europe-middle-east/russia-and-eurasia https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/europe-middle-east/russia... So, Ukraine will get an exemption, too, right? Because their trade is even a mooter point, right? Right?!
- pembrook 2y ago
  This is down from $23B in 2019, and is basically just fertilizer and minerals used to make fertilizer. Fertilizer is not sanctioned due to the fact it’s needed for food security in the EU (surprise suprise, the EU is not just insecure domestically in terms of military and energy and technology, but also in terms of fertilizers needed to grow food, fantastic governance they have over there…leaving potash mining or nat gas extraction to other countries does look good for those domestic net zero calculations though!).
  - tashbarg 2y ago
    This reply makes the mootest point of all the moot points.
  - Towaway69 2y ago
    EU peace is assured by inter-locking trade within the block. Countries within the EU are gently encouraged to trade essential goods with one another instead of producing them themselves. This policy dates back to the end of WW2 as an attempt to prevent one country getting too aggressive and hence starting another war. Since the fall of the wall, Russia was seen as a legitimate trading partner for the block and, in the long term (just as Türkiye), as member of the block. Hence sourcing fertiliser from Russia was taken to be a strategic positive since it tired Russia to Europe.
    - kolanos 2y ago
      > Hence sourcing fertiliser from Russia was taken to be a strategic positive since it tired Russia to Europe. And you still defend this as a strategic positive?
      - Towaway69 2y ago
        I think we should be aware of history, that does not imply acceptance nor agreement. Instead had I said this ten years ago, the majority of politicians in the EU would have been d’accord. What does that imply about our political systems? There have been a bunch of alliances in Europe over the centuries, none have been permanent.
      - poincaredisk 2y ago
        It was a rational and logical thing to do, assuming Russia wants prosperity. Sadly, it turns out people with power in Russia don't really care about that for regular people. So... I think it was a good thing after all. It could've worked out, and bring us peace. A moonshot with great payoff but some chance of failing is often a risk worth taking, HN should know that :)
- DanielVZ 2y ago
  I don’t see Ukraine on the list at least. But I do see this as a win for Russia in the destabilization of the Western economy.
  - StormChaser_5 2y ago
    It's on the list. They have to pay 10%
    - DanielVZ 2y ago
      I stand corrected
RealityVoid 2y ago
Didn't seem to be an issue for the penguin islands.
im_down_w_otp 2y ago
They tariffed uninhabited land, countries that export nothing to the US, and countries for which the US has a trade surplus. All those circumstances also would have made the point moot... yet they all still made the list.
overfeed 2y ago
The administration placed tariffs on uninhabited islands. I don't think they gave a rat's patootie about the volume of trade.

There is still more trade with Russia than many countries in the list. Even Syria and Iran got tariffs.

Total trade with Russia in 2024: $3.5bn Total trade with Ukraine in 2024: $2.9bn https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/europe-middle-east/russia-and-eurasia https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/europe-middle-east/russia... So, Ukraine will get an exemption, too, right? Because their trade is even a mooter point, right? Right?!

pembrook 2y ago
This is down from $23B in 2019, and is basically just fertilizer and minerals used to make fertilizer. Fertilizer is not sanctioned due to the fact it’s needed for food security in the EU (surprise suprise, the EU is not just insecure domestically in terms of military and energy and technology, but also in terms of fertilizers needed to grow food, fantastic governance they have over there…leaving potash mining or nat gas extraction to other countries does look good for those domestic net zero calculations though!).
- tashbarg 2y ago
  This reply makes the mootest point of all the moot points.
- Towaway69 2y ago
  EU peace is assured by inter-locking trade within the block. Countries within the EU are gently encouraged to trade essential goods with one another instead of producing them themselves. This policy dates back to the end of WW2 as an attempt to prevent one country getting too aggressive and hence starting another war. Since the fall of the wall, Russia was seen as a legitimate trading partner for the block and, in the long term (just as Türkiye), as member of the block. Hence sourcing fertiliser from Russia was taken to be a strategic positive since it tired Russia to Europe.
  - kolanos 2y ago
    > Hence sourcing fertiliser from Russia was taken to be a strategic positive since it tired Russia to Europe. And you still defend this as a strategic positive?
    - Towaway69 2y ago
      I think we should be aware of history, that does not imply acceptance nor agreement. Instead had I said this ten years ago, the majority of politicians in the EU would have been d’accord. What does that imply about our political systems? There have been a bunch of alliances in Europe over the centuries, none have been permanent.
    - poincaredisk 2y ago
      It was a rational and logical thing to do, assuming Russia wants prosperity. Sadly, it turns out people with power in Russia don't really care about that for regular people. So... I think it was a good thing after all. It could've worked out, and bring us peace. A moonshot with great payoff but some chance of failing is often a risk worth taking, HN should know that :)
DanielVZ 2y ago
I don’t see Ukraine on the list at least. But I do see this as a win for Russia in the destabilization of the Western economy.
- StormChaser_5 2y ago
  It's on the list. They have to pay 10%
  - DanielVZ 2y ago
    I stand corrected

RealityVoid 2y ago

Didn't seem to be an issue for the penguin islands.

im_down_w_otp 2y ago

They tariffed uninhabited land, countries that export nothing to the US, and countries for which the US has a trade surplus. All those circumstances also would have made the point moot... yet they all still made the list.

overfeed 2y ago

The administration placed tariffs on uninhabited islands. I don't think they gave a rat's patootie about the volume of trade.