Russia Said to Get Ready for Iran-Style Sanctions in Worst Case

[Purveyor]

By Evgenia Pismennaya and Ilya Arkhipov Mar 12, 2014 4:48 PM ET

Russian government officials and businessmen are readying for sanctions resembling those applied to Iran after what they see as the inevitable annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea region, according to four people with knowledge of the preparations.

Iran-style retaliation from the West, which would include freezing Russia’s foreign reserves, banking assets and halting lending to companies, is being treated as an unlikely worst-case scenario, according to the people who asked not to be identified as the talks are under way. Officials are calculating the cost to the economy, the people said.

Some political leaders are hoping that President Vladimir Putin will moderate his response to the crisis, the people said. A sanctions war, with Russia retaliating against the West, could wipe out 10 years of achievements in financial and monetary policy, one of them said. Such escalation could erase as much as a third of the ruble’s value, another said.

Dmitry Peskov, Putin’s spokesman, declined to comment.

The Ukraine crisis triggered the worst standoff between Russia and the West since the end of the Cold War after Russian forces seized the Crimean peninsula. German Chancellor Angela Merkel yesterday said a round of European Union sanctions is “unavoidable” if Putin’s government fails to take steps to ease tensions.

‘Get Ugly’

In Washington, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry yesterday said at a congressional hearing that sanctions on Russia could “get ugly fast” if events justified them. Group of Seven countries called on Putin to “immediately halt” efforts to pry Crimea away from Ukraine, to reduce Russian forces to pre-crisis numbers and to allow international monitors and mediation.

more...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-12/russia-said-to-get-ready-for-iran-style-sanctions-in-worst-case.html

[Catherina]

1. Our cold war warriors are off their rocker

Last edited Thu Mar 13, 2014, 01:21 AM - Edit history (1)

At a debate at the conservative Heritage Foundation, a panel of diplomats and commentators dismissed the Obama administration’s previous diplomatic attempt at a “Russian reset”.

“The current crisis is not an aberration, it is the culmination of many years” of Russian policy, said Stephen Blank, a senior fellow with the American Foreign Policy Council.

Luke Coffey, a fellow at Heritage, said that before any American military intervention, “Ukrainians are going to have to show us that they think Crimea is worth dying for.”

Blank proposed long-term actions, suggesting the installation of a permanent Nato fleet in the Black Sea, and American missile defences in the Baltic states.

“If Russia tears up arms treaty, I’d say: ‘Be my guest. We’re prepared to spend you into the ground,’” Blank said.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/12/us-aid-ukraine-limbo-congress-imf-reforms

"We’re prepared to spend you into the ground"? Oh yeah? With what money? Whose money? That's right, I forgot, with that $20 Trillion worth of debt you stopped counting a long time ago.

Say, how are those Detroit pensions coming along?

[cprise]

6. We desperately need a 'Neocon reset'

If international law is so very important to the US, then its high time to put the war criminals in jail and get those people out of our hair and out of the business of escalating conflicts for profit.

[Catherina]

7. +10000. But maybe that was the inside joke about the reset button all along

the one that didn't work the day they gave it to Russia. Maybe that was the joke all along that it was a neocon reset
because this is the same Hillary who brought PNAC Victoria Nuland on board at the State Department and set up an 85 person team to channel "the domestic energy boom into a geopolitical tool to advance American interests around the world.”

At the helm of the new energy diplomacy effort is Carlos Pascual, a former American ambassador to Ukraine, who leads the State Department’s Bureau of Energy Resources. The 85-person bureau was created in late 2011 by Hillary Rodham Clinton, the secretary of state at the time, for the purpose of channeling the domestic energy boom into a geopolitical tool to advance American interests around the world.

In an interview, Mr. Pascual asserted that his team’s efforts had already weakened Mr. Putin’s hand, and had helped lower Ukraine’s dependence on Russia for natural gas supplies to 60 percent, down from 90 percent.

Mr. Pascual said that his team had worked to help Ukraine and other European countries break away from dependence on Russian gas by finding supplies elsewhere, including Africa, and assisting the Europeans to build up their natural gas storage. The team, he said, is working with Ukraine and the European Union on completing a European energy charter, which already allows natural gas to move more quickly through Europe and permits countries to negotiate lower rates with Gazprom.

In addition, he said, the team is helping countries develop their own natural gas resources, including in partnership with American energy giants. Halliburton has started fracking for natural gas in Poland, while Shell last year signed a contract to explore for natural gas in Ukraine.

I'm sorry. I took that excerpt from this thread : The Ukraine Crisis Is Bolstering America's Oil And Gas Boom where Hillary's action are put into better context.

[phleshdef]

2. Putin is basically setting himself up for failure.

I really do believe the stories of him losing touch with reality might be true. He has no reason to take the risks he is taking, considering the consequences could be total economic disaster for Russia under his command.

[Igel]

3. Risks are just probabilities.

If they don't materialize then there's no penalty. He figures that the West is bluffing. They might be. Or, more likely, they'll put in place some half- or quarter measures for a while and then let them lapse. Yes, there'll be a small price for Russia to pay for the Crimea.

However, he's probably thinking "Georgia." The result of what happened there was at least three-fold. He got a piece of territory back for his Russian empire while humiliating and weakening a neighboring state. He destroyed Saakashvili, to the great relief of more than a few DUers, and got rid of a thorn in his side. And most importantly, he made Georgia too great a risk for NATO. NATO treated Georgia like it was Chernobyl' and is glad to have a buffer between itself and Russia--which is what Russia wants.

It was worth the price for Russia to achieve these ends. A simple transaction that set the market value on territory and population. That's what some international politics is, and formerly was: How to trade population for peace, how to trade another country's goals and well-being for your own. Sounds vulgar, but that's the deal made with the West by the USSR at the conclusion of WWII, and confirmed in Hungary and Poland in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1967, and in numerous other ways small and large since then. Having determined what kind of moral fibre the West is made of, all the rest is haggling over the details of price for each individual transaction. We didn't value Abkhazia highly at all. Georgia was bargain-basement. Ukraine? Well see, but the price has fallen so most would almost pay Putin to take Ukraine, just leave us alone..

[Purveyor]

5. kick. Thanks for posting. +1 eom

[bemildred]

4. So are we. nt