The Western sanctions against Russia seem to shock very few Westerns. Yet, for several reasons, these sanctions should at least be the subject of lively debate in Western societies.
Firstly, these sanctions are illegal from the standpoint of international
law (only the Security Council can approve economic sanctions, according to
Article 41 of the Charter of the United Nations). They could legitimately be
considered an act of war by Russia, with all the terrifying consequences that
such an interpretation could have. Thus, regardless whether Russia’s invasion
of Ukraine is considered a violation of international law, such an economic war
waged by the West in Russia cannot be justified on the part of nations that do
not have defense agreements with Ukraine and which are not at war with Russia. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Secondly, sanctions do
not work, if their aim is to change the behavior of the government of the
target country or, more indirectly, to impoverish the population so that it
revolts successfully against the government. No historical examples seem to
exist where either of these two goals has been achieved. Moreover, the
calculated impoverishment of a foreign population in order to achieve
unattainable political goals is profoundly cynical and callous. As Justin Raimondo
wrote over two decades ago,
such sanctions are thus “the logical
consequence of a mindset that equates the people of a nation with its
government, and therefore punishes the former for the crimes (both real and
imagined) of the latter.”
As far as it is possible, and as usual, the State must be to prevented from doing
harm not only to the own population, but even more importantly to foreign
populations.
Countries such as Cuba, North Korea, Iran and Venezuela have for decades been
under American and European sanctions almost as harsh as those currently facing
Russia. All these countries have populations who suffer economically for this
reason, but who support their governments against these external economic aggressions.
However, even though
The economic war declared by the West against Russia has had the effect of
convincing the minority of Russians who were not yet convinced, that the
Russian government have been right all these years, when it has warned about
the threat posed by US foreign policy and Western countries under its
influence. While many urban Russians initially opposed the invasion of a brotherly
country, the brutal sanctions, including the confiscation of around $300
billion from the Russian Central Bank, has actually reinforced
public support for President Putin.
If it wasn’t clear before for the Russian population, it is now: the goal of
the US government is regime change is Moscow, and the war in Ukraine is just a
pretext and simply the current battlefield of that long-term objective. What
Raimondo commented about
the Cuban and Iraqi people is as valid today for the Russians: “as the people starve, they are amenable to
the proposition that the main enemy is not at home, but in Washington, D.C.”.
Moreover, the Russian economy is much larger and more diversified than those
of the countries mentioned above. Indeed, the latest Russian economic news indicate
that the measures
taken by the authorities, such as capital controls and restrictions on holding
foreign currency, are maintaining the stability of the economy in the face of
sanctions. Indeed, the ruble has returned to pre-invasion
levels, industrial production rose at an annual rate of 4.5% in March, and the key interest rate was reduced
from 20% to 17%, which is close to the level of recent years. There is all the
more reason to think then that Western sanctions won’t change the political power
in Russia.
The Russian population will undoubtedly still feel the effects of these
sanctions, especially when stocks of Western goods are sold out. However, the economic
consequences of the sanctions will be mitigated to some extent by the import
substitution plan being set up. Autarchy,
that is, trade only within a geography limited by artificial political
boundaries, is always less economically efficient than an economy based on free
trade on a global level. But in a context of almost total lack of trust between
interventionist governments that mostly follow geopolitical interests not
shared by their own populations, autarchy is sometimes a logical response.
The Boomerang Effect of These Sanctions
It is hard to believe that Western leaders were in their right minds when
they agreed on these sanctions. In their eagerness to punish Russia, the
long-term global consequences were probably not adequately considered.
The realization of the ineffectiveness of the sanctions against Russia is
now pushing Western leaders to dangerously up the ante, blinded by their unrealistic
obsession to see Russia crumble. While the effects of possible new waves of
sanctions against "Fortress Russia" are debatable to say the least,
it is now clear that sanctions already in place are turning against the West.
These sanctions can also be seen from another angle: it is the Western nations
that voluntarily deprive themselves of Russian imports and exports; of natural
resources and access to the Russian market. By preventing their businesses and
consumers from benefiting from these economic exchanges with one of the biggest
economies in the world and the top exporter of natural resources, Western politicians
are condemning their own populations to suffer a completely artificial
reduction in competitiveness and savings over the long term. These sanctions
therefore represent yet another unacceptable intervention by governments in the
economic freedom of their societies.
The economic hardships that the West has now inflicted on itself by these
sanctions are compounded by the two years of inflationary policies linked to
the pandemic. It is now necessary to prepare for economic recession and social
crisis in many countries. The sanctions that Western leaders have irresponsibly
enacted against Russia, will harm the people who elected them. But as usual, the
opinions of the people are not considered, because the democratic system is an
illusion when it comes to the interests of the State.
Nevertheless, economic impact means political impact. The political consequences
of these sanctions will be felt not only in the United States and Europe, but
also in the rest of the world. In many countries, food
shortages will lead of uprisings. Serious political difficulties are
already shaking Pakistan, Peru, and Sri Lanka, partially in connection with
these anti-Russia sanctions. There is therefore also a fundamentally humanitarian
reason for firmly opposing these sanctions against Russia.
It is shocking to see what the Western political
leaders have yet again done to the world.
They have unleashed a total economic war on Russia with political and
economic consequences that will lead to the destruction of both lives and
wealth around the world. To think that this could all have been prevented, if
only Western threats and hubris had been replaced by diplomacy and realism with
respect to Russia, in the years, months, and even weeks leading up to this war.
çankırı
ReplyDeletetekirdağ
giresun
manisa
PZHTS