52 ms·

Russian companies are commonly registered in Cyprus, and the money flow back to Russia. Source: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2023/11/14/dirt

Russian companies are commonly registered in Cyprus, and the money flow back to Russia. Source: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2023/11/14/dirty-money-and-russian-riches-flow-through-cyprus-a-gateway-to-the-eu_6255018_8.html https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2023/11/14/d...

ivan_gammel 1y ago
I am certainly well aware of that. However this proves nothing and my question still stands. Not every company founded by Russians on Cyprus is a money-laundering or a war-funding enterprise. Tax optimization - yes, everyone does that. Friendly jurisdiction - yes, and now more than ever, if you are Russian, you want to do business but stay away from Russian government. A lot of people actually moved to Cyprus because they were opposing the war. Is there any specific evidence that Habr supports the war? This is not a rhetoric question, I expect the answer and I'm fine if the answer is yes.
- lostmsu 1y ago
  They perpetrate Russian censorship.
- regnull 1y ago
  We are not talking about convicting them in a court of law. It's perfectly fine to refuse to deal with Russian companies because every ruble they pay in taxes goes to support the war. When the whole society (and yes, regular people too) are in favor of waging a war of their neighbor, refusing to deal with their companies should and must become the default way of action.
  - ivan_gammel 1y ago
    Maybe you should read this then: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment Just like with BDS in case of Israel, this principle is incompatible with Western values. If you apply collective punishment to Russia, how are you different from them?
    - libertine 1y ago
      > The punished group may often have no direct association with the perpetrator other than living in the same area and can not be assumed to exercise control over the perpetrator's actions. Here, the point that's raised is: isn't there any collective responsibility for a group of people that support and re-elect a political leader with 87% of votes, who was, and promised to continue engaging in a war of genocide? Notice that I'm being cynical here, referencing the 87% vote count. While it might be a theatrical display, the regime likes to preach about the legitimacy of Democracy (especially how Ukraine is conducting its democracy), and Russians accepted these results - so even if it's not actually 87%, it's still high. Also, let's not forget that a lot of the invading force is composed of individuals with entrepreneurial ambitions; they're contractors, not conscripts, meaning people who sign up to get well paid to go to Ukraine and kill as many Ukrainians as possible, just because they're Ukrainians. The latest estimates of +950.000 Russian casualties point that it's not just a few people willing to do this, but a lot. So the question that I want to ask you is, at what point does collective responsibility apply? Two points to clarify: - This is an honest question, because I don't know the answer to it, but I just don't think that "there should never be collective responsibility" is a good answer. - Collective responsibility =/= perpetual collective responsibility =/= collective punishment;
      - ivan_gammel 1y ago
        >So the question that I want to ask you is, at what point does collective responsibility apply? There’s no such point. This is the main reason why Russia is still not under full trade embargo and Russian citizens can still get visas. Justice is a fundamental human right, so sanctions always target individuals after some due process and may be repealed in court.
        libertine 1y ago
        > There’s no such point. Well, I disagree; the people of a nation contributing to and supporting genocide are responsible in part. > This is the main reason why Russia is still not under full trade embargo and Russian citizens can still get visas. I don't think those are the main reasons: - Embargo would have a global economic impact and would have to be militarily enforced; Also, it wouldn't be enforced everywhere as Russia has borders with countries that aren't sanctioning them. - As far as I know, Russian citizens can't get Visas everywhere; several European countries have banned all sorts of visas for Russian citizens. In fact, there's a case to be made that Russians are being collectively held accountable, for example: - Sanctions; - Seizing of Russian State assets (they don't belong to Putin or the regime, these assets actually belong to Russians); - Visa bans;

ivan_gammel 1y ago

I am certainly well aware of that. However this proves nothing and my question still stands. Not every company founded by Russians on Cyprus is a money-laundering or a war-funding enterprise. Tax optimization - yes, everyone does that. Friendly jurisdiction - yes, and now more than ever, if you are Russian, you want to do business but stay away from Russian government. A lot of people actually moved to Cyprus because they were opposing the war. Is there any specific evidence that Habr supports the war? This is not a rhetoric question, I expect the answer and I'm fine if the answer is yes.

lostmsu 1y ago
They perpetrate Russian censorship.
regnull 1y ago
We are not talking about convicting them in a court of law. It's perfectly fine to refuse to deal with Russian companies because every ruble they pay in taxes goes to support the war. When the whole society (and yes, regular people too) are in favor of waging a war of their neighbor, refusing to deal with their companies should and must become the default way of action.
- ivan_gammel 1y ago
  Maybe you should read this then: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_punishment Just like with BDS in case of Israel, this principle is incompatible with Western values. If you apply collective punishment to Russia, how are you different from them?
  - libertine 1y ago
    > The punished group may often have no direct association with the perpetrator other than living in the same area and can not be assumed to exercise control over the perpetrator's actions. Here, the point that's raised is: isn't there any collective responsibility for a group of people that support and re-elect a political leader with 87% of votes, who was, and promised to continue engaging in a war of genocide? Notice that I'm being cynical here, referencing the 87% vote count. While it might be a theatrical display, the regime likes to preach about the legitimacy of Democracy (especially how Ukraine is conducting its democracy), and Russians accepted these results - so even if it's not actually 87%, it's still high. Also, let's not forget that a lot of the invading force is composed of individuals with entrepreneurial ambitions; they're contractors, not conscripts, meaning people who sign up to get well paid to go to Ukraine and kill as many Ukrainians as possible, just because they're Ukrainians. The latest estimates of +950.000 Russian casualties point that it's not just a few people willing to do this, but a lot. So the question that I want to ask you is, at what point does collective responsibility apply? Two points to clarify: - This is an honest question, because I don't know the answer to it, but I just don't think that "there should never be collective responsibility" is a good answer. - Collective responsibility =/= perpetual collective responsibility =/= collective punishment;
    - ivan_gammel 1y ago
      >So the question that I want to ask you is, at what point does collective responsibility apply? There’s no such point. This is the main reason why Russia is still not under full trade embargo and Russian citizens can still get visas. Justice is a fundamental human right, so sanctions always target individuals after some due process and may be repealed in court.
      - libertine 1y ago
        > There’s no such point. Well, I disagree; the people of a nation contributing to and supporting genocide are responsible in part. > This is the main reason why Russia is still not under full trade embargo and Russian citizens can still get visas. I don't think those are the main reasons: - Embargo would have a global economic impact and would have to be militarily enforced; Also, it wouldn't be enforced everywhere as Russia has borders with countries that aren't sanctioning them. - As far as I know, Russian citizens can't get Visas everywhere; several European countries have banned all sorts of visas for Russian citizens. In fact, there's a case to be made that Russians are being collectively held accountable, for example: - Sanctions; - Seizing of Russian State assets (they don't belong to Putin or the regime, these assets actually belong to Russians); - Visa bans;