Ukraine (closed; covers till August 2014)

[jmm99]

USAToday, Obama imposes sanctions on 7 Russians after Crimea vote (17 Mar 2014):

WASHINGTON — President Obama announced Monday that he is leveling new sanctions against seven Russian officials the White House says have contributed to the crisis in Ukraine.

Obama announced the sanctions one day after the Crimean region of Ukraine voted overwhelmingly to join Russia in a referendum that the U.S. and western allies vowed not to recognize.

In comments at the White House to formally announce the sanctions, Obama said he believes there is still a diplomatic solution to end the crisis. At the same time, he warned that if Russia continues to interfere with Ukraine's sovereignty he stands ready to push for even tougher sanctions.

"We are imposing sanctions on specific individuals for undermining the sovereignty, territorial integrity and government of Ukraine," Obama said."We are making it clear that there are consequences for their actions."

The high-level government officials named by the White House are: Vladislav Surkov, Sergey Glazyev, Leonid Slutsky, Andrei Klishas, Valentina Matviyenko, Dmitry Rogozin, and Yelena Mizulina.
...
In addition, the Treasury Department announced it is imposing sanctions against former Ukraine President Viktor Yanukovych, former Ukrainian presidential chief of staff Viktor Medvedchuk as well as Crimea-based separatist leaders Sergey Aksyonov and Vladimir Konstantinov. Those officials were being targeted under an executive order that Obama signed earlier this month.
...
The White House announcement came after the European Union announced on Monday travel bans and asset freezes on 21 people for their involvement in the Ukraine crisis. The EU is not expected to announce the individuals who are being cited until Tuesday, but Obama administration officials believe there is some overlap in the U.S. and EU lists. ...

Seriously, is this the vaunted first round of sanctions ?

What comes next in what appears to be an exercise in strategic persuasion in accord with the doctrine of gradualism ?

Regards

Mike

[carl]

Mike:

That's the exact thing I thought when I heard about it, Operation Rolling Thunder. All those guys who died at the behest of fools. Sometimes it's good to be old, you can spot fools easier. But it's sad too because the fools never seem to stop coming.

By the way, that was a good story about your mother buying you books. My parents never said no about books either. Long ago.

[jmm99]

One of my neighbors (way back then and more recently) graduated from Tech a year or two after I did, and went on to fly F-4s in the later stages of Rolling Thunder (which by then was a total shooting gallery - e.g., an amusement park for the NVA gunners and rocketeers); and later still in Linebacker I and II. The last two yielded positive tangible results.

Of course, the theoretical graduated escalation strategy sounds good - especially for those who are not willing to take and inflict substantial immediate casualties. It does offer the hope (not a very good strategy) that peace can be achieved before one mounts too many rings up the ladder.

Has a graduated escalation strategy worked in any war ? Serious question for someone who has actually studied it in depth. I haven't.

Regards

Mike

PS: My mother's philosophy was that one is rich if, besides having a roof over one's head and food on the table, one has soap, water and a library card - then it depended on the person in the use of those riches. My dad's contribution (besides the roof and food) was to buy me as much .22LR ammo as I wanted to shoot.

[Firn]

From an economic point of view it is important to look how the most similar 'independent' seperatist area, Abkhazia is doing. In this case Russian forces have enabled the creation of a new entity, practically completely politically isolated apart from Russian support. It was a tourism magnet before the collapse of the SU, with splendid beaches, but it has only 1/8 of Crimeas population and Russian tanks can just drive over the border. The economic and political situation was of course more desperate and especially more violent and in this case Russia supports another ethnic group which is barely larger then the second ethnicity.

In 2010 the following EU paper described the state of the economy:

B. ECONOMIC ASPECTS

1.Dependence on Russian financial aid and investment

Even though Abkhazia’s state budget has been steadily increasing over the past years, its dependence on Russia for budget support is as important as its reliance on Moscow’s military presence. In 2009, approximately 60 per cent (1.9 billion roubles, $65.5 million) of the state budget was direct support from Moscow. For 2010, the monetary figure will remain the same but fall in percentage terms, to 49 per cent (1.9 billion roubles, $63 million, out of a total budget of 3.875 billion roubles, $128.5 million). This includes both infrastructure projects and direct budget support. Russia also pays local pensions – many times larger than the Abkhazian gov-
ernment’s $17 monthly allocations – to Russian pass-
port holders, directly from its own budget.

Russia also accounts for 99 percent of Abkhazia’s “foreign investment” and is by far its largest trade partner. In 2008, (figures for 2009 are incomplete) Abkhazian exports totalled 890 million roubles, while imports were 6.2 billion, leaving a deficit of over 5 billion roubles ($165.8 million). Abkhazia mainly exports scrap metal, gravel, tea, tangerines, hazelnuts, wine and some flowers. In 2008 there was some trade with Turkey (metals, lumber exports and fuel imports) and Romania (fuel imports), but Abkhazian officials gave no amounts or monetary value. They estimated that 80 per cent of everything consumed in Abkhazia is imported from Russia.

The bit about the pensions to Russian passport owners out of the Russia budget is expecially interesting. Of course the Crimean pensions have been much higher and there should be a multiple of recipients. The balance of trade was even more amazing then I thought, roughly a relation of seven to one. On the other hand it is no surprise that Russia has to pay half of Abkhazias budget. If it was to do the same it could easily have to pay directly twenty times more.

I have to leave it there for now but there is some interesting stuff to add later.

[Firn]

I have to leave it there for now but there is some interesting stuff to add later.

A more recent paper on the Abkhazian economy:

B. Russian Financial Dependence

Abkhazia’s government is overwhelmingly dependent on Russia for budget and development funds. Since 2009 Moscow has provided about 1.9 billion roubles per year in direct budgetary support ($61-$67 million, depending on exchange fluctutions). In 2012, this amounted to 22 per cent of the official 8.6 billion rouble ($287 million) budget. But taking into account that Moscow allocated another 4.9 billion roubles ($163 million) that year as part of a “comprehensive aid plan” for infrastructure development, the actual subsidy for Abkhazia’s budget is at least 70 per cent. In addition, Moscow also hands out an estimated two billion roubles ($70 million) in pension payments for Abkhaz residents, most with Russian passports.

If we consider that example I think it is pretty likely that we see three major channels through which Russian money will flow into the Crimea:

1) Direct financial transfers to finance the Crimean speratist budget
2) Moscow-sponsered and cheaply financed infrastructure projects, mostly done by Russian companies
3) Direct transfers to retirees.

Only the first will be budgeted in, so as in the case of Abkhazia that portion alone would vastly underestimated the financial dependence.

The “[c]omprehensive aid plan for the socio-economic development of Abkhazia” is by far the biggest source of Russian funds – but also opaque and controversial Under it, Moscow orginally earmerked eleven billion ruble ($350 million) for frastructure projects in 2010-2012, including the rebuilding of roads, schools, government buildings and agriculture. Though many residents of Abkhazia say living standards have risen as Russian money has come in, some critics complain of a dependency syndrome, and both Abkhaz and Russian officials have alleged the funds have fuelled corruption. An opposition figure known for harsh opposition to the present Abkhaz leadership lamented: “Abkhazia’s economy is like a drug addict on Russian help. We want real help to support our economic development, not ‘façade’ assistance”.

The critical comments reflect my earlier concerns. The public sector will baloon compared to the private one, even if the multiplier will have partly a positive effect in some areas. Other parts of the private sector will be crowded out. This without taking even in consideraton the effect of the likely increased (up from bad) corruption and wrong investment allocation.

Italy's south encountered similar problems, but form a different basis and a different set of circumstances when forty to thirty years ago the state massively 'invested' into it. Ironically quite a few described it as 'drogato' by those public funds, which went mostly into the wrong hands and greatly increased in the long run the dependence on public spending. The gdp per capita rose for a short time to roughly 80% compared to the rest of the country but fell over the next twenty+ years to back to 60% or so...

To sum it up it the Crimean economy won't do well without getting very expensive for Russia, and in that case the long term growth doesn't look good either.

[JMA]

I suggest we are witness to a watershed moment in history.

We are witnessing the demise the US as the preeminent world power.

Unlikely that Russia will be brought down to earth by even a joint US/EU series of measures.

A deeply poignant and sad moment.

[Dayuhan]

Has there been a day in the last 5 decades that has not seen somebody, somewhere. proclaiming the demise of American power?

Pardon us if we fail to wail and rend our garments. If we did that every time we heard that our trade balance with China would be even worse than it already is.

[JMA]

Ken White said that - too similar for simple coincidence - a few years ago.

I was being kind in what I said because having watched the controlled implosion of the remnants of the British Empire and with it British influence I appreciate how painful the demise of the US as the leading world power must be to the majority of Americans.

With Ukraine, however, we now witness abject cowardice from the US and Britain.

Lets start here:

Budapest Memorandums on Security Assurances, 1994

Quote 1:

The Presidents of Ukraine, Russian Federation and United States of America, and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom signed three memorandums (UN Document A/49/765) on December 5, 1994, with the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Through this agreement, these countries (later to include China and France in individual statements) gave national security assurances to Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine. The Joint Declaration by the Russian Federation and the United States of America of December 4, 2009 confirmed their commitment.

Quote 2:

1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine;

2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or

political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations;

etc

Not worth the paper it was written on...

Has there been a day in the last 5 decades that has not seen somebody, somewhere. proclaiming the demise of American power?

Pardon us if we fail to wail and rend our garments. If we did that every time we heard that our trade balance with China would be even worse than it already is.