Ukraine Thread

[Sarmatian]

Results of the 18th round of Ukrainian Premier League, as reported by Ukrainian television

12.12. 18:00 Dyn. Kiev Shakhtar Donetsk 3 : 4
11.12. 18:30 Stal Kamianske FK Zorya Luhansk 0 : 2
11.12. 16:00 Oleksandriya Ch. Odessa 2 : 1
11.12. 13:00 Karpaty Zirka Kropyvnytskyi 2 : 3
10.12. 13:00 Volyn Lutsk Vorskla Poltava 0 : 1
09.12. 18:00 Dnipro Olimpik Donetsk 1 : 1

[Hooahguy]

With Rex Tillerson (who explicitly stated that he is anti-sanctions) as Secretary of State I would be interested to see if the Russia sanctions hold up. It really comes down to congress and if they will buck the president on this or end up easing sanctions (if not totally removing them).

[Seamus Fermanagh]

He was anti-sanctions when they were getting in the way of making money for his stockholders.

Now the USA itself is his "stockholder." We shall see if he takes a different stance in his new executive role.

[Hooahguy]

I would be skeptical that he would change his tune much. He has stated that sanctions dont work, so it would be strange to do an about-face on this. But in the end though it is congress who decided sanctions so Im not too worried. What I am worried most about though is him recognizing the Russian takeover of Crimea.

[Husar]

Rex Tillerson? Sounds like a B-movie villain...

[Seamus Fermanagh]

De jure we never will. De facto, the US and NATO already have.

[Gilrandir]

I wonder if the Senate (or the Congress) is likely to turn down any nominee offered by the president. I mean is the US parliament really active in approving the choices of POTUS or does he act like the British monarch in approving ANY prime minister offered by the parliament?

[Hooahguy]

I wonder if the Senate (or the Congress) is likely to turn down any nominee offered by the president. I mean is the US parliament really active in approving the choices of POTUS or does he act like the British monarch in approving ANY prime minister offered by the parliament?

Im expecting a fight against him, but thats really the only nominee I would expect an actual fight against. Many in the GOP have already stated their displeasure with the appointment.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I wonder if the Senate (or the Congress) is likely to turn down any nominee offered by the president. I mean is the US parliament really active in approving the choices of POTUS or does he act like the British monarch in approving ANY prime minister offered by the parliament?

There is a tradition that the President gets their choice for all but judicial appointments unless something "over the top" is discovered while vetting. Even then, the number of people voted down by Congress is very small -- usually the nomination is withdrawn if somebody finds a gnarly skeleton in a closet somewhere.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I would be skeptical that he would change his tune much. He has stated that sanctions dont work, so it would be strange to do an about-face on this. But in the end though it is congress who decided sanctions so Im not too worried. What I am worried most about though is him recognizing the Russian takeover of Crimea.

Well- what's the point of sanctions?

We know they don't deliver regime change, so they're basically there to express our annoyance - which they have done. At some point persecuting Russia starts to benefit Putin's policy. Any constant enforced by one party in diplomacy ends up being turned to the advantage of the target in some way eventually because it's a constant.

At this point we should arguably be lifting all non arms-related sanctions. That will greatly reduce Putin's ability to blame Russia's systemic problems on the West whilst also forcing Russia to pay for all it's own military R&D and driving up the per-capita cost of their new equipment by reducing their ability to sell it oversees and thereby economise their production lines.

[Hooahguy]

Well- what's the point of sanctions?

We know they don't deliver regime change, so they're basically there to express our annoyance - which they have done. At some point persecuting Russia starts to benefit Putin's policy. Any constant enforced by one party in diplomacy ends up being turned to the advantage of the target in some way eventually because it's a constant.

At this point we should arguably be lifting all non arms-related sanctions. That will greatly reduce Putin's ability to blame Russia's systemic problems on the West whilst also forcing Russia to pay for all it's own military R&D and driving up the per-capita cost of their new equipment by reducing their ability to sell it oversees and thereby economise their production lines.

Sanctions are essentially economic violence. We arent going to go to war with Russia over Ukraine so this is the next best thing. True, the impact of sanctions on Russia haven't been much when compared to the impact of falling oil prices (most economists think that the Russian economy has been impacted three times more by falling oil prices than by sanctions). But they havent made it easy either. The arms embargo has certainly hurt, as the sale of the French Mistral carriers was cancelled. Limiting sanctions to just arms sales would definitely make it easier for their economy to recover. Im skeptical that sanctions have caused the anti-west sentiment, they have been blaming the west on their troubles for years before all this happened. And mind you, sanctions by the EU didnt really begin until the MH17 disaster, a disaster which the evidence solidly points to Russian implication.

[Gilrandir]

Well- what's the point of sanctions?

We know they don't deliver regime change, so they're basically there to express our annoyance - which they have done. At some point persecuting Russia starts to benefit Putin's policy. Any constant enforced by one party in diplomacy ends up being turned to the advantage of the target in some way eventually because it's a constant.

At this point we should arguably be lifting all non arms-related sanctions. That will greatly reduce Putin's ability to blame Russia's systemic problems on the West whilst also forcing Russia to pay for all it's own military R&D and driving up the per-capita cost of their new equipment by reducing their ability to sell it oversees and thereby economise their production lines.

You may be right speaking of the sanctions which are being enforced now - they may be annoying, but aren't that effective. But, in my opinion, you draw a wrong conclusion. Why weren't/aren't sanctions effective? Perhaps because the West is reluctant to introduce the sanctions that WILL hurt? So, if you want sanctions to be effective choose the ones properly - like the one with quick money or whatever it is called. Otherwise it is complaining that the disease persists making the patient take halfdoses of medicines.

As for sanctions as a cause of anti-west hysteria in Russia - this:

Im skeptical that sanctions have caused the anti-west sentiment, they have been blaming the west on their troubles for years before all this happened.

The arms embargo has certainly hurt, as the sale of the French Mistral carriers was cancelled.

Oh, come on! Who needs those cockleboats when they have this: