Pages

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

A Primer On Sanctions Against Russia


In the end, economic sanction is almost always more effective than military action
However, we prefer military action because it evokes a perversely pleasing visceral response.

***


"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. Instead of diminishing evil, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. So it goes. ... Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that."
  • 'Where Do We Go From Here?" as published in Where Do We Go from Here : Chaos or Community? (1967)

Martin Luther King Jr.
Wikiquotes

***


 A primer on the sanctions against Russia. Krishnadev Calamur in NPR.


IAN BRZEZINSKI: 3 ways NATO can boost Ukraine's security. "NATO's response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine has drawn a red line, but it is one that leaves Ukraine militarily isolated, fending for itself. If the West's economic and diplomatic sanctions are to deter Moscow from further military aggression, they must be complemented by a robust defensive strategy to reinforce Ukraine's armed forces....NATO's response to this crisis is critical to both Ukraine's security and the alliance's long-term future. A NATO summit planned for September is to focus on the alliance's way forward in a new world. But what it does to assist Ukraine today and in the coming weeks will have a far more profound influence on its future and transatlantic security." Ian J. Brzezinski in The Washington Post.

PIFER: George W. Bush was tough on Russia? Give me a break. "As the Obama administration copes with Russia's annexation of Crimea and continuing pressure on Ukraine, its actions invariably invite comparison to the Bush administration's response to the 2008 Georgian-Russian war. But as the Obama White House readies potentially more potent economic sanctions against Russia, former Bush administration officials are bandying a revisionist history of the Georgia conflict that suggests a far more robust American response than there actually was. Neither White House had good options for influencing Russian President Vladimir Putin. And this time, the fast-moving developments on the ground in Ukraine confront the United States with tough choices. Because the West will not go to war over Crimea, U.S. and European officials must rely on political, diplomatic and financial measures to punish Moscow, while seeking to launch negotiations involving Russia in order to de-escalate and ultimately stabilize the Ukraine situation. They are not having an easy time of it. Neither did the Bush administration during the 2008 Georgia-Russia war." Steven Pifer in Politico Magazine.

STEPHENS: Apologies for Vladimir. "Our new Kremlinogists now tell us that Mr. Putin's gambits need to be understood in the context of Russia's historic foreign policy objectives. True up to a point. But Mr. Putin is also pursuing his own interests as ringleader in a corrupt oligarchy sitting on the economic time bomb that is a commodities-based economy. The best U.S. policy will seek to light the shortest fuse on that bomb, strengthen our allies, and contain the fallout." Bret Stephens in The Wall Street Journal.


No comments:

Post a Comment