Illustration copyright Getty Images Image caption Congressional bill given to Trump ample opportunities to impose sanctions

The bill providing for additional sanctions against Russia, approved the day before by the US Congress, will affect oil production projects, construction of oil pipelines and privatization. The BBC Russian service asked experts to assess the scale of the threat.

The lower house of Congress approved new restrictions yesterday as part of a package of sanctions against Russia, Iran and North Korea. Now this package must go to US President Donald Trump for signature.

The package itself represents a large volume of documents that combines and complements the existing sanctions.

The BBC Russian service asked the director of the program " Economic policy"Carnegie Moscow Center Andrey Movchan and chief economist at Uralsib Bank Alexey Devyatov about the main innovations of the new package of sanctions.

Oil projects

The new document expands restrictions on the supply of goods, services and technologies needed for the implementation of new projects for the development of deep-sea oil fields, as well as fields in the Arctic and shale production.

Previously, such restrictions applied to projects of five Russian companies that are considered leaders in the oil industry - Rosneft, Gazprom, Gazprom Neft, Lukoil and Surgutneftegaz. These companies have limited cooperation with foreign partners, as well as limited opportunities to purchase Western equipment and technologies.

Many companies made large investments in oil production and the development of new fields even before the adoption of sanctions, which allowed them, despite the restrictions imposed by Western countries and falling prices. At the same time, Rosneft annually expands its investment program.

New restrictions may affect joint projects: American companies risk losing the opportunity to participate in projects where the share of Russian companies exceeds 33%. They will not be able to sell equipment and technology for such projects or participate in them.

However, there are almost no such projects, says Movchan: Russian companies almost never produce shale and deep-water oil.

There are well-known developments on the shelf, where Russian companies participate in partnership with foreigners. For example, Lukoil is participating in the development of the Shah Deniz offshore gas condensate field in Azerbaijan, but owns only 10% of the shares, which is less than the norm established by the project.

This measure is aimed at projects that “have the potential to produce oil,” the bill explains. “Many places sound menacing, but in practice they are not applicable,” Movchan says about them.

The US oil lobby, in particular ExxonMobil and Chevron, opposed limiting the participation of American companies in joint projects, the Wall Street Journal reported in early July. Exxon, in particular, worried that the restrictions could undermine the company's competitive position in the world.

Restrictions on the construction of oil pipelines

The document also provides for restrictions on the supply of technologies and services necessary for the construction of pipelines. The restrictions apply if an individual item is worth $1 million or more, or if $5 million or more of goods were shipped in the last 12 months.

Thus, American congressmen want to limit Russia’s ability to create infrastructure for the export of energy resources, the bill says.

These proposals, according to Movchan, jeopardize the implementation of the Turkish Stream and other projects. Sanctions could threaten projects such as Nord Stream and Sakhalin-2, the Financial Times wrote, citing data from the European Commission.

However, the document also states that these projects must be agreed upon with “local economic partners” in order to impose restrictions. “I think it will be very difficult to obtain these approvals, because the Europeans are interested in these projects,” Movchan believes.

Illustration copyright Roland Weihrauch/dpa/TASS Image caption The European Commission, according to media reports, fears that US sanctions will interfere with the construction of pipelines

The European Union reacted nervously to the bill. European Commission spokesman Margaritis Schinas said that the European Commission is following the adoption of sanctions “with some concern that concerns the independence of the European Union’s energy sector and energy security interests.”

In the long term, this may have a negative impact on Russian projects, Devyatov believes. “Some projects that could be implemented will either not be implemented at all, or will be implemented with a significant delay,” he believes.

Privatization of state-owned companies

Another set of restrictions concerns the privatization of state-owned companies. The US President may impose sanctions against American companies or citizens if they invest more than $10 million in assets as part of the privatization of state property in Russia and if any Russian officials or members of their families benefit from this. The same applies to a total investment of $10 million over a period of 12 months.

It is not entirely clear how the mechanism that will determine whether officials benefited from privatization will work, Devyatov notes. “Here, probably, we mean the condition if the prices of the assets being sold differ markedly from the market and fair ones,” he explains. It is in such situations that there is usually a suspicion that someone is making money from this, the economist continues.

The privatization process in Russia is inactive, and there are few chances for a new large privatization program in the country, Movchan agrees.

Russia without American funding

American banks will not be able to issue more than $10 million to an organization or person on the sanctions list in 12 months.

The United States, according to the bill, can limit funding for Russian projects international funds, if, in the opinion of the authorities, companies or people on the sanctions list will benefit from such assistance.

The document also suggests other financial restrictions in the United States for individuals and companies from the sanctions list: they may be denied banking operations, real estate transactions, the securities market, and others.

According to Movchan, Russian companies and the economy as a whole do not depend much on financing from American banks or international organizations. The expert notes that financing from other countries is available for companies; for example, some companies can still borrow from European banks even in dollars.

Moreover, during the sanctions, Russian companies have seriously reduced their external debt; they need less money to repay loans.

According to the Central Bank, Russian companies now owe foreigners about $351 billion. These are mainly bank loans, as well as obligations to various investors.

The bill also recommends that the US Treasury discuss with the State Department and intelligence officials the possibility of introducing restrictions on the purchase of Russian government debt. According to the Central Bank, Russia's external public debt as of July 1 of this year amounted to $47.2 billion. These are mainly securities in foreign and Russian currencies that are traded on the market.

“If foreigners are prohibited from holding our sovereign bonds, this could be unpleasant,” Devyatov admits. This could increase capital outflow and slow down economic growth by 0.7-0.8 percentage points. and lead to a weakening of the ruble, the economist predicts. This could also have a negative impact on Russia's budget, he suggests.

The impact on the budget will most likely be moderate, the economist continues. The Russian budget is deficit and, according to the Ministry of Finance, will remain so in the coming years. However, to finance the deficit, the authorities do not plan to resort to external borrowing - until 2020, the main sources of financing the deficit, according to the Ministry of Finance, will be borrowing from the domestic market, as well as funds from the Reserve Fund and the National Welfare Fund.

Punish companies involved in cyber attacks

Separate sanctions are being introduced against individuals and companies associated with cyber attacks on the United States during the election period.

Various restrictions related to finance, business, and entry into the United States will be imposed on people and organizations whose activities undermine cybersecurity and who are associated with the Russian government. The same applies to people and organizations that, according to US authorities, provided them with financial, material or technological support.

According to the document, people on this list may have their assets in the United States and any transactions related to them blocked.

Similar sanctions could also be imposed against those who violate human rights, are involved in arms exports to Syria, or are in any way connected with the situation in Ukraine.

They may also be denied visas or be expelled from the United States. There are already quite a lot of names on such lists - for example, the head of Rostec Sergei Chemezov, the special representative of the Russian President on environmental issues Sergei Ivanov, who previously headed the presidential administration, the head of Chechnya Ramzan Kadyrov and others.

Devyatov explains that the problems of individual individuals, even very rich ones, are unlikely to create problems for the Russian economy as a whole.

The document spells out the possibility of broadly applying sanctions; it contains “a lot of rights and, in general, no responsibilities,” and a lot of checks and balances, Movchan sums up.

The United States is preparing to impose new sanctions against Russia; the lower house of the American Congress is expected to vote on the corresponding bill on Tuesday, July 25. This document was previously approved by the Senate. It is not yet clear whether US President Donald Trump will sign the decision, but White House press secretary Sarah Sanders assured that he supports the new sanctions package.

The document, in particular, provides for reducing the maximum term of market financing for Russian banks under sanctions to 14 days (currently 90 days), and for oil and gas companies to 30 days. The sanctions, among other things, are aimed at the construction of the Russian Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, through which fuel should be supplied to Germany along the bottom of the Baltic Sea, bypassing Ukraine and Poland. Brussels reacted ambiguously to this idea, recommending that the United States first consult with the European Union on such “sensitive issues.” The sensitivity of restrictions regarding Nord Stream 2 is primarily due to the fact that Germany is interested in the construction of the gas pipeline, while some other EU countries, including Poland and Slovakia, should be happy about such a turn. At the same time, in response to American sanctions, the European Union may take countermeasures.

At the same time, the European Union may impose new sanctions against Russia due to the scandal surrounding the supply of Siemens gas turbines to the occupied Crimea.

Until now, the EU and the US have adopted sanctions against the Russian Federation almost simultaneously. Over time, other countries, including Ukraine, joined them. Today, about 150 people and 40 companies are under Western sanctions. Ukrainian ones affect almost 700 people and about 300 companies, including branches of all Russian state banks.

Russia did not remain in debt and introduced counter-sanctions, banning a number of Western politicians from entering its territory. However, the most famous is the food embargo on relevant products from the United States, European and other countries - again including Ukraine.

Anti-Russian sanctions in action

The introduction of sanctions, contrary to the statements of Russian politicians, has an impact on the Russian economy, and this impact is quite negative. The crisis in the Russian economy is confirmed by macro indicators. GDP growth in 2014 was only 0.7%, compared with the original forecast of 2.5%. In 2015, the Russian economy collapsed by 3%. In 2016, GDP continued to fall by 0.2%.

Sanctions also provoked a colossal outflow of capital from the Russian Federation - in 2014 it amounted to $153 billion, in 2015 - $57.5 billion, in 2016 - $15.4 billion. “The sanctions regime makes international investment capital very nervous. In the case of tough sanctions, there is a flight of domestic capital and a colossal outflow of foreign capital,” Russian financier Slava Rabinovich said in a commentary to Apostrophe.

Due to sanctions, economic cooperation between the Russian Federation and other countries is declining. Thus, in 2015, trade turnover between Russia and the EU fell by 40%. Cooperation with Ukraine is also on the decline - over three years of “trade wars”, trade turnover between the countries has fallen five times.

Context

Sanctions have quarreled Europe and America

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 07/25/2017

USA - EU: clash of interests

Politico 07/24/2017

US sanctions against Russia have always been

National Public Radio 07/23/2017 At the same time, according to the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation, in 2014-2015, due to food counter-sanctions, prices for food products in Russia increased by almost a third (31.6%). The price jump was especially noticeable in 2015 (the Russian Federation introduced a food embargo in August 2014).

Overall, sanctions have significantly undermined the financial solvency of Russians. In particular, this is due to the collapse of the Russian ruble. December 6, 2014 went down in Russian history as “Black Tuesday,” when the ruble at auction fell from 60 rubles per dollar to almost 80 rubles per dollar. Despite the fact that the Russian currency later recovered some of this fall, its rate was never able to return to the level of just over 30 rubles per dollar, which was a year earlier, and Bloomberg called the Russian ruble the worst currency of 2014. Today, for an American dollar they give about 60 Russian rubles.

Due to the decline in real incomes, Russians have become less likely to travel abroad. According to official data, the flow of tourists from the Russian Federation in 2015 decreased by almost 20%. In 2016, it also fell, but at a slower rate - by 8%.

However, travel, especially abroad, is not basic need person. But there are big problems with the latter in Russia. According to a study by the Russian Center for Economic and political reforms, in the Russian Federation, families spend 70-100% of their salary budget on essentials. At the same time, according to the RANEPA Institute for Social Forecasting, about a third of all Russians are at risk of falling into poverty.

Sanctions hit sectors

One of the consequences of the sanctions is the inability of the Russian Federation to use the technologies it needs. Such restrictions are experienced by all areas, but they are especially noticeable for the military-industrial complex. The Russian military-industrial complex is heavily dependent on components that were previously purchased from Ukrainian manufacturers. For aviation, for example, these are products of the Motor Sich company (Zaporozhye), which produces engines for airplanes and helicopters. In the space sector of the Russian Federation for many years it was tied to launch vehicles and missile systems, developed by Yuzhnoye Design Bureau (Dnepr). Due to the cessation of supplies of Ukrainian gas turbine units to the Zorya-Mashproekt enterprise (Nikolaev), Russia cannot complete the construction of a number of ships for its navy. As a result, the ships will be sold to India, which will independently purchase the necessary propulsion systems.

In order to circumvent sanctions, the Russian leadership often resorts to deception, as happened with the scandal surrounding Siemens turbines in Crimea.

Another important effect of the sanctions is the restriction of Russian business’s access to so-called “cheap” money in Western banks. If in 2013 Russia attracted $46.4 billion on the Eurobond market, then in 2015 this figure decreased almost 10 times - to approximately $5 billion. According to Slava Rabinovich, in Russia there is a catastrophic rise in the price of what financiers call WACC - weighted average cost of capital (weighted average cost of capital). “When sanctions are imposed, when fleeing investment capital, as risks increase, the weighted average cost of capital increases multiple times, and accordingly, it becomes increasingly difficult for companies to remain profitable. What we see now in Russia is a catastrophic decline in profitability, a catastrophic decline in the share of profitable companies,” the expert noted.

Despite the obvious negative effect of sanctions on the Russian economy, the figures indicate that their influence has weakened somewhat recently. This indicates that Russia was able to adapt to the sanctions, says Russian economist Dmitry Nekrasov. “Especially at the first stage in 2014, when there was a capital outflow of about $150-160 billion, the introduction of sanctions had a very strong impact on the Russian economy. In the medium term, the sanctions still have an impact, but we can’t talk about any terrible things. It is clear that this is holding back economic growth, but in general, capital outflow has greatly decreased, and many companies have learned to circumvent all these sanctions,” the expert said in a commentary to Apostrophe, adding that in the long term, “sanctions will greatly undermine opportunities for economic growth in Russia."

If the United States accepts a new sanctions package, the implementation of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project will be in jeopardy - serious companies simply will not risk participating in it.

In addition, new sanctions will complicate already tight borrowing conditions for Russian companies and banks. And this will contribute to a further deterioration of the economic situation in the Russian Federation.

Slava Rabinovich predicts that maintaining the sanctions regime will be a colossal blow to the Russian banking system. According to him, several systemically important banks have lent to a significant part of the Russian economy, and Sberbank accounts for lending to approximately half of the entire Russian economy.

“If the entire Russian economy begins to collapse in the form of massive bankruptcies of companies, this will be followed by the collapse of the banking system,” the expert said. According to him, attempts to save systemically important banks will necessitate an issue, which “will lead to the collapse of the ruble, which will lead, in turn, to the cessation of the ruble’s validity as a unit of account in international trade, which will lead to the collapse of imports.”

“What we are seeing is nothing more than slow motion footage of a train crash. They can only slow down or speed up, but a train wreck will absolutely happen,” concluded Rabinovich.

InoSMI materials contain assessments exclusively of foreign media and do not reflect the position of the InoSMI editorial staff.

All comments

• 08:20 26.07.2017 | 32

  ALICE

  and dream and dream, purely crests

• 11:17 26.07.2017 | 3

  GreyCat

  purely crests ------- rotten... How can one not remember where the saying about the neighbor’s cow came from.

• 13:44 26.07.2017 | 0

  Conservative reactionary

  ALICE, “New sanctions against Russia: a collapse will absolutely happen” - but let’s take them at their word. We'll just see what happens in six months or a year. But I will say one thing - when Ukraine is covered with a copper basin, I will not cry and I will not transfer money. And I will not accept refugees from among the “Bratsk people”.

• 16:39 27.07.2017 | 0

  gennadiy21

  A conservative reactionary, it would be reasonable to confine himself to the glory of Rabinovich and co*.

• 14:14 26.07.2017 | 0

  trick

  ALICE, they think it didn’t work out the first time, but it certainly didn’t work out the second time. History teaches nothing to fools.

• 08:25 26.07.2017 | 18

  alchi

• 16:32 26.07.2017 | 0

  darsan7796

  alchi, “According to Slava Rabinovich” Yes, this is Slavik! Do you know a beer place on a cracker? So he belongs there! This Friday we'll ask the asshole for the market!

• 22:32 26.07.2017 | 1

  Marquis Aamon

  alchi, wake up. back in 1811, such forecasts were published in Paris itself!

• 08:26 26.07.2017 | 9

  Tovlacherov

  How scary it is to live)))))))

• 05:56 27.07.2017 | 0

  samsonoff.aleksei2012

  Tovlacherov, don’t even tell me... :-)

• 08:26 26.07.2017 | 3

  g.goworowa

  Close-minded... this won’t make it any easier for you. Russia stood, stands and will stand

• 08:30 26.07.2017 | -4

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  Stupid bastards! Well, what do sanctions have to do with it? Some kind of laughter sanctions! Our economy is in trouble for two other painful reasons: 1) Oil, the breadwinner, and gas, the father, are now sold at ridiculous prices. And for a World Energy Power it is simply indecent. 2) For the last 15 years, our Leader has steered the country’s economy personally, in manual mode, which earlier (well, when oil was worth a hundred and there were enough goodies for everyone) he liked to brag about with a slight squint to the journalist brethren on occasion. Well, now I’ve finally got around to it... Hmm... Or maybe I’m wrong, that’s how it was all planned? After all, on the other hand, everything is not so bad, after all, the Kremlin found another 7 lard dollars in 2017 to invest in the US economy? By the way, in total, in this way we support the economy of “our partner” (who either imposes sanctions on us or compares us to Ebola) by more than a hundred lard dollars. So everything is smooth! No money! True, against this background, it is not clear why for the fourth year the Kremlin has again confiscated citizens’ pension savings from the Pension Fund to the budget? But maybe they just overlooked it? In the end, we are now living at the end of two great eras of the current political regime, when the era of the Brilliant wives of the Leader’s modest and faithful companions is being replaced by the era of the Brilliant sons of the Leader’s modest and faithful companions. Apparently, the Russian Aristocracy is emerging again! I am sure that the cost of living of ten thousand rubles will certainly be raised soon! Perhaps even as much as 500 rubles right away! The country is rich! World power! Stupid bastards don't talk...

• 08:43 26.07.2017 | -2

  electroyandex

  Trotsky was not on the moon. You repeat yourself about wives and children, nags, or you have neither a wife nor children.

• 08:55 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  electroyandex, I would like to draw your attention. Nothing more. As Karla Radek once said, we live in interesting times, comrades! From a historical point of view, very interesting! No joke. electroyandex, and regarding my personal life, let me assure you in the most honest way, everything is fine with me! By the way, there is good news: pensions have been raised by as much as two hundred rubles! So there is reason for optimism!

• 15:56 26.07.2017 | 0

  tues39

  electroyandex, please name oil prices until 2005? just - for our general education, to know)))

• 08:53 26.07.2017 | 1

  U-2

  Trotsky was not on the moon, can you tell us more about the confiscation of the population’s pension savings? Tell us which categories of pensioners and their pensions have ALREADY (!!) suffered from this. Or why and who will suffer in the future. Do you even know the topic you're talking about?! Do you remember the pensions that existed before GDP?

• 09:12 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  U-2, I already said before, someday they will write about this political regime: it took him ten years to bring Russia out of the 90s, and then in another ten years this regime returned Russia to the 90s. Dear, the current withdrawals from the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation will come back to haunt us in twenty years. Apparently, this is why, keeping in mind the parable of the padishah and the donkey, the current government is so free and free to transfer citizens’ pension contributions to the budget, where they are simply eaten up. By the way, I have never heard of the Kremlin’s plans to return to the Pension Fund the money withdrawn from the budget in previous years. Or have you heard something about this? Cumulative contributions from citizens of the Russian Federation are one of the largest inflows cash in the Pension Fund of Russia (except for pensions of security forces). The average pension of a Russian is determined from the amount of money in the Pension Fund (I’ll explain it in a simplified way). Accordingly, if there is a pool from which water leaves through a pipe, and another pipe (through which water enters the pool) is blocked, then the hole in the PFR will only grow. And every year more and more. And given our demographics and the fact that on average our population is aging (the share of pensioners for every working citizen is constantly growing). In a word, there is no reason to be surprised why in Russia the average pension (I do not take into account the pensions of officials and judges) is an order of magnitude less than in Serbia and Poland. And it's not strange. Considering the attitude of our government towards the Pension Fund of Russia, this is natural. I remember that even Yarovaya, in response to her Super Law, proposed to withdraw the lard required for its implementation from the Pension Fund. True, the authorities here had enough conscience not to ruin the future pensions of Russians for this nonsense. It seems they found a simpler way out: the costs of the Yarovaya megalaw will be placed on the shoulders of citizens, including them in the tariffs for phone calls and Internet charges. Why? Our people are rich, they can handle this too.

• 09:30 26.07.2017 | 3

  electroyandex

  Trotsky was not on the moon, Everyone understands everything perfectly well about the situation in the country, fortunately there is enough information. Therefore, your flood of nightingales about “how bad everything is” is perceived as an annoying fly. It’s one thing if this is a way to make money, another to show how smart and dissatisfied you are .

• 10:08 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

• 09:33 26.07.2017 | 2

  U-2

  Trotsky wasn’t on the moon, you idiot! Not a single pension ruble has been taken away from anyone’s pension. Neither today nor yesterday. The pension fund has a huge deficit, so it is physically impossible to steal from there. They shamefully merged with the issue of the size of pensions before Putin. You are trying to hide the gaping emptiness with verbosity... sad... Personal request, change your nickname and avatar. According to the Soviet habit, I have a negative, but fair, attitude towards Trotsky, and you are showing inhumane lawlessness towards him.

• 11:00 26.07.2017 | 0

  connecting rod-shah

  U-2, now liberals on every talk show remember grandmothers, but in the 90s under the EBN, when pensions and salaries were delayed and not paid for half a year or more, everyone, including the West, applauded us...

• 11:11 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  They shamefully merged the issue of the size of pensions before Putin.... U-2, no, it didn’t merge. I’ll tell you more, if you compare pensions under GDP and under Ivan the Terrible, the gain in favor of GDP will be even greater. Again, do you think that if under Yeltsin gas and oil were worth a hundred, Yeltsin would not have paid old people a good pension? The GDP has increased somewhat, but... Inflation and rising prices VERY quickly eat up this difference between Yeltsin’s and foreign pensions. ..There is a huge deficit in the pension fund... That's right, DEFICIT! And instead of covering this deficit, this hole is widened even further, depriving the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation of the main source of money inflow, namely, withdrawing citizens’ pension savings into the budget. By the way, you are aware that until 2013, the withdrawal of money from the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation was actually illegal. Even a special law, vague and incomprehensible, was immediately adopted for this matter, apparently, it was completely screwed up. ... Trotsky was one of the Fathers of the Revolution. Personally, you can treat him however you like. But if it weren’t for him, it is far from a fact that the USSR would have come into existence at all. And you were never a Soviet person. And I answer for my words: Trotsky never actually went to the Moon.

• 11:38 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  U-2, U-2, now liberals on every talk show remember grandmothers... It was not the liberals who ruined the country. The country was destroyed by the communists. In which today’s people have also unconditionally believed for all 70 years and have marched obediently towards a bright future. And in the 90s, money was borrowed from the IMF so that people would not die of hunger. And mother oil together with mother gas cost 20 points. If under Yeltsin there had been a hundred percent of oil, I’m sure he would also generously hand out high pensions and salaries, maybe he would now be called nothing less than the Father of the Nation. Damn the world economy let us down...

• 09:55 26.07.2017 | 1

  cabin boy Pacific

  Trotsky was not on the moon. Frankly speaking, you are a useless expert, why show something that doesn’t exist.

• 11:13 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  Pacific cabin boy, I’ll be happy to listen to your conclusions, dear Great Expert! Where is our country going? Where is the current political regime leading it? What are we developing? Democracy? Technocracy? Monarchism? Liberalism? Our prospects in social affairs, science, on the world stage? I expressed my opinion and am confident, to my deep regret, that the current regime is slowly but surely mutating into the Yeltsin regime.

• 09:57 26.07.2017 | 2

  connecting rod-shah

  Trotsky was not on the moon, why do you think that your cost of living should be increased at all, no one owes you anything, if the poor are your problems, we will again live by subsistence farming, as in the nineties, but nothing good will happen, at least change it a hundred times and hang out, the authorities are not smarsa, it’s us ourselves and any of us, once there, will do the same thing... and all the indignation that there is no access to the feeding trough, that’s all... there is a huge expanse here and everything is for us, it’s the Middle Ages outside.. .

• 11:16 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  Shatun Shah, well... Your post can probably be framed) Although it’s sad. I won't argue with you. Actually, you are stating the actual state of affairs in the country.

• 11:57 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  Why do you think that your cost of living should be increased at all? there will be problems. If a person plows, but only has enough money to survive, then don’t expect unnecessary patriotism from such a person (how will he go to fight for the country tomorrow if his family at home can barely make ends meet). And in general, there are a lot of disadvantages if the majority of the population in the country is poor. This has happened before. Under Nicholas II. And then something suddenly took hold and burst into flames. Bang and that's it. He took the people and believed the marginal radical Lenin.

• 10:35 26.07.2017 | 1

  Merkuriy

  Trotsky wasn’t on the moon, you can’t even manage the entrance, why are you pretending to be smart? Your reasoning is finger-sucking in an attempt to console yourself. However, you can go to the thriving hoklopopia, if you are not already there.

• 11:34 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  Merkuriy, that’s the whole trouble: there’s not even anything to console yourself with. The picture of the immediate prospects and future of our country emerges as natural and deserved. And yes, I’ve never managed the entrance)) Well, maybe I’ll have the chance, who knows) My reasoning is the most ordinary facts. And I don’t understand why you’re so mad at them? By the way, the hosts are really our brothers. We are one people. Very similar. For we ourselves are never to blame for anything (neither we nor the crests). For we (like the crests) are God’s chosen people and we have our own special path (no one, however, knows which one, neither we nor the crests). The State Department is always to blame for all our troubles (the crests say “damn the Muscovites”). In general, our bosses are in some kind of mental dependence on those from Kyiv (no matter how funny it may sound). Examples: Back in the late 90s, Khozly began to put “brilliant talents” (usually the children of high-ranking officials) at the head of their STATE factories - ours ruined this business somewhere in the mid-2000s. We know the outcome of Ukrainian industry, and soon, apparently, we will also know the outcome of our personnel policy at state-owned enterprises (there is no easy oil money now to plug the holes from the results of managing state assets with “young talents”). Only the locals established a national guard and ours, apparently having studied how the national guard is capable of mercilessly fighting the enemies of the state, immediately created a national guard in the Russian Federation. True, we went even further - even in “individual cases” we will subordinate army units to the national guards. (this, by the way, did not happen either under the Republic of Ingushetia or under the USSR). Only the crests began to fight the Internet (bans on social networks and so on), and I see that ours are quickly catching up... In a word, I am already afraid of the initiatives of Poroshenko and the Rada. Ours will certainly distort, and even multiply)

• 15:29 26.07.2017 | 0

  Merkuriy

  Trotsky was not on the moon, your reasoning is not facts, because you are talking about the future, trying to find analogies in different cases (comparing the national guard of Ukraine and Russia in particular), trying to draw conclusions from your own reasoning. And yes, you don’t blame yourself, you found the culprit in Putin (yes, yes, he personally runs everything, I haven’t read it, but I condemn it). Unlike you, I am not looking for the guilty, the problems of Russia are the problems of all its inhabitants, from the janitor to the president. And you can continue to look for demons and consider these to be facts. PS Peter the Great, in an attempt to change the country, began with its mentality.

• 16:16 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  Your reasoning is not facts, because you are talking about the future, trying to find analogies in different cases... Merkuriy, for the last almost 18 years the country has been following the course destined by the GDP, its faithful associates, its ruling party. And therefore, I think it’s wrong to ask the janitor, along with the Leader, that we have again wandered somewhere into a dead end. I'm not looking for someone to blame. And I give an assessment of the 18-year-old political regime of GDP. I give my assessment based on my own conclusions (which, by the way, is hardly interesting to GDP itself) and the reality that I see before my eyes every day. In other words, I express my opinion about what is happening in the country. By the way, my right, if anything... And my opinion is this: I am against GDP, because I think that it domestic politics is erroneous and dangerous for Russia, the political course of GDP is disastrous for Russia. In parallel, exactly, I compare the processes that are taking place in our country with those processes that are taking place in the neighboring country. And you must agree that there is something in common in these processes. And, dear sir, in our country the court determines the guilty. I will repeat my forecast: someday they will write about this political regime that it took ten years for it to bring Russia out of the 90s, and then in another ten years this regime returned Russia to the 90s. And who will we ask for this, for the result of a long-term reign (most likely, by the way, we won’t ask anyone, someone will die by then, and someone will go to their dachas near Paris or in Bali) from the GDP, from the janitor, from the prime minister, from bikers, from Edra deputies or teachers and doctors, this is another question.

• 11:38 26.07.2017 | 2

  cabin boy Pacific

  Trotsky was not on the moon, I am not an expert, I have lived in this country for more than one or even four decades, and I see how things are going with us. It’s hard, with effort, but they go, in better side, and as for the economy, this is dealt with by the government, not the president.

• 11:51 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  the cabin boy is Pacific, and as for the economy, this is dealt with by the government, not the president... Yes, well))) I don’t remember how many times over the last 15 years (well, while it was raining petrodollars, now, but he doesn’t like about remember this) our Leader liked to emphasize that he steers the country manually, delves into all economic decisions... This is like his pearls about the Great Energy Power (again, while oil was for a hundred). Otherwise, some kind of crap turns out, while the country is on the rise, money flows from the Pipe like a river, we are a Great Energy Power - is it all thanks to the Leader? And when they sank, it’s all Lame Misha’s fault, right? Well, well)) ... It’s hard, with effort, but things are going for the better... Believe me, I really, really hope that YOU are right, and not me. But no one has repealed the laws of economics and political science. And 2x2=4. And therefore... I am extremely pessimistic about the course that the current political regime is leading our country.

• 11:54 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the Moon, 1. precisely because the prices are ridiculous and indecent, all sorts of trash came to this market with their slates? 2. about steering the economy personally by the Leader and boasting, proof would not hurt.

• 12:13 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  Sn, heh))) What about competition, no? In the same way, if all the trash hadn’t entered the market with their processors and LCD monitors, then dealers in calculators and typewriters would have continued to earn crazy money)) And then the trash flooded the market with laptops) And the prices for calculators and typewriters became ridiculous .. Again and before, study the oil market in the 19th and 20th centuries, oil prices always moved in a sinusoidal manner (depending on fluctuations in the world economy), one decade they hit the ceiling, the next decade they fall below the baseboard. World economy, fuck her mother) Eh, if oil-breadwinner ALWAYS (constant) cost two hundred bucks per barrel, no question, our Leader, yes, would go down in history as the Great OZ. But... Damn reality always destroys aspirations and dreams. Before GDP, Brezhnev could be called the darling of oil)) Of course, oil did not cost under a hundred then. But then the dollar itself was worth more. I won’t even try to throw off the proofs. This happened a great many times. The image of GDP has always been built on this, they say, he personally, does not sleep at night, delves into everything, and especially into ECONOMIC DECISIONS. And it is his policies, his decisions that are implemented by a loyal and obedient government and an equally loyal and obedient ruling party. When he beat his heels on his chest, exclaiming “Yes, I am a galley slave.” And now he’s like he’s out of business or something?) Heh... It’ll be a beautiful curve. Gebyat-gebyat, I was not aware, these are all liberals and the State Department, please understand and forgive? Heh... The most offensive thing is that it would be better if he actually served out his two terms and left. But no, you see, he turned into another Savior of Russia and a Raiser of the country from its knees. In September, by the way, he will break Brezhnev’s record for steering the country)

• 12:07 26.07.2017 | 1

  cabin boy Pacific

  Trotsky was not on the Moon. You know, due to the nature of my work, I often go to the store (not for groceries, my wife does this) and buy drills, hammer drills, or some other technical stuff, and I noticed that in recent years a lot of Russian production appeared. Someone criticizes for poor quality, someone praises it, anything can happen, the main thing is what appeared, conclusion: The economy is doing well, it’s bad, it’s poor, but it’s doing well, I hope it will prosper. And if, instead of working, we squeal “they’re robbing us,” I don’t think you need to tell me what will happen. In our country, in only a hundred years, the country collapsed 2 times, and only thanks to people like our President it did not completely collapse. By the way, your respected Trotsky also had a hand in uniting the country.

• 12:26 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  cabin boy Pacific, I repeat, believe me, I really, really, really hope that YOU are right, and not me. Nobody is saying that nothing was done under GDP. A lot has been done. The trouble is that with GDP, a lot of things have also been done (missed) (in my opinion) that in the end, I’m afraid, will multiply all the good things by zero. Namely: rampant corruption, unbridled officials, cop lawlessness (or when a regiment finds 9 lard in his sister’s house, isn’t it lawlessness?), some kind of feudal personnel policy (excuse me, when a guy at 33 years old is neither smart nor knowledgeable in aircraft construction to steer the largest aviation enterprise? Who appointed Vasilyev to the RF Ministry of Defense? hmm... Yes, something is being done somewhere (it feels like it’s purely for show). Those who are caught are imprisoned. But some systematic approach absent. Again, well, VVP will sit in the Kremlin for another 15 years. And then what? Again, from the “close lads”, the new conditional “Khrushchev” with the new conditional “Beria” will share power, again almost putting the country (as the real Khrushchev and Beria did) on the brink of civil war? It’s a problem when a country has no political traditions. I'm a liberal. I'm a technocrat. Maybe that's my problem. Maybe my worldview is simply different, different from yours. And therefore, I am extremely pessimistic about the course of the current political regime.

• 12:32 26.07.2017 | 0

  cabin boy Pacific

  Trotsky was not on the Moon. Forgive me, but you write what happened, I know that, but can you write what needs to be done? Here's a little stupid question (eternal) WHAT TO DO?

• 13:13 26.07.2017 | 0

  Trotsky was not on the moon

  Pacific cabin boy, this is the question of Herr Chernyshevsky in the novel “What is to be done”? was asked back in 1862! Not a damn thing has changed in a hundred and fifty years, right? Honestly, I would start with corruption. I mean, not only bribes and kickbacks (this, by the way, is still tolerable), but more really feudal personnel policy and clanism. By the way, there is something to learn here from our Western partners and from China. And in the USSR, again, there were a lot of good developments on this topic. In my understanding, corruption is the country’s most terrible enemy (worse than the State Department), that’s for sure. The most annoying thing is that in many countries this has been and is being done (corruption cannot be completely eradicated, of course, but it can actually be reduced). I won’t describe technically how to do this, all this was invented before us, all this can be implemented if there is political will. Introduce a political principle on the rotation of power. Just like in China. Every ten years the leadership at the top must change. So that the Yevon comrades do not become too fused with their high chairs. Has the Chinese government found the strength to do this? And this happens. Let members of the same party come to power, but these are still new people, which means the former owners of the country will be careful about grabbing too much (tomorrow the new owners may ask for old business). This is where you should start. Then the time will come for the next reforms. There is no need to unpack everything en masse.

Volatility in the markets “both with the next wave of US sanctions rhetoric against Russia and with the unstable situation in emerging markets.” He assured that the economy has become more stable in recent years, and the government and the Central Bank “have all the necessary tools to ensure financial stability.”

Why did the fall stop?

The dynamics of exchange rates have stabilized, as “the first emotions have subsided, the main outflow of non-residents from OFZs has ended, and Brent oil has settled at just above $72 per barrel,” says BCS Premier investment strategist Alexander Bakhtin. The pressure on the ruble “should gradually subside,” he predicts: “It is possible that by the end of the week the dollar exchange rate may adjust downward and reach 63-64.5 rubles.”

Stabilization of the exchange rate at about 66 rubles. is not surprising, since the new sanctions look less painful than those of Senators Menendez and Graham, says Natalia Orlova, chief economist at Alfa Bank. “We see the trading range for the coming week at the levels of 64.25-67.50 rubles. for a dollar,” she said in the review.

Yesterday, the ruble “overreacted” to the bill of American senators, says Nordea Bank economist Tatyana Evdokimova. She emphasizes that Senator Graham, the initiator of the bill to strengthen anti-Russian sanctions, introduced 13 bills in 2017, of which only one became law.

What are the new sanctions?

The State Department announced on August 8 that the US administration had concluded that Russia was involved in the use of a toxic chemical agent in the assassination attempt on Sergei and Yulia Skripal in March of this year. In accordance with the Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act of 1991, the US President is obliged to impose sanctions against a country that, according to the US government, has used chemical weapons prohibited by international conventions.

The law provides for two rounds of such sanctions, and the first will come into force on August 22. An additional round of sanctions could be imposed in 90 days if Russia does not meet certain conditions (its government must provide guarantees against the future use of chemical or biological weapons and must be willing to allow international inspectors into its facilities).

Russia became only the third country against which American sanctions have been applied under this law in 27 years. The first was Syria in 2013, the second was North Korea in 2018 (the US government concluded that North Korea was involved in the assassination of the North Korean leader's half-brother in Malaysia in 2017 using the nerve agent VX).

The fact that the Trump administration applied the anti-chemical weapons law to Russia is significant. political significance, but the economic consequences of these sanctions will most likely be purely symbolic. The mandatory set of sanctions, which will go into effect on August 22, includes cutting off foreign aid to Russia from the United States, cutting off arms supplies and financing for weapons purchases, denying American government loans and banning the export to Russia of goods and technologies that are “nationally sensitive.” Security" USA.

The export of American weapons to Russia is already prohibited, and the United States does not provide government loans to Russia (on the contrary, until recently Russia was). There could be some losses in bilateral trade, with "several hundred million dollars" worth of shipments (per year) potentially affected, a State Department official told a briefing. But the US government has already provided several exceptions that are allowed by the 1991 law, and therefore the restrictions will be much more lenient.

What exceptions did the State Department promise?

First, the United States will continue to provide “foreign assistance to Russia and its people” (including humanitarian assistance, development assistance human capital), a State Department representative indicated. Secondly, sanctions prohibiting the export of sensitive goods will not affect space cooperation between Russia and the United States. In addition, goods and technologies necessary for the safety of commercial passenger aviation will be exempt from the new sanctions. Finally, licenses for the export of sensitive products from the United States will continue to be issued on a case-by-case basis where the end user is a “purely commercial consumer” for a purely civilian use.

Currently, supplies to Russia of American goods and technologies that are sensitive from the point of view of national security (this is a large list, including, for example, aeroderivative gas turbines, electronic devices and components, integrated circuits, measuring and calibration equipment, various materials, etc.), are possible only with an export license from the US Department of Commerce. These licenses are already issued with difficulty. Now, as a State Department representative said at a briefing, such licenses will be automatically denied if the final recipient of sensitive products is an organization associated with Russian state. Such consumers in Russia could potentially lose “hundreds of millions of dollars” in future supplies, a State Department spokesman said.

In 2016 (the latest available statistics), the US Department of Commerce reviewed 502 applications for the export/re-export of goods to Russia totaling $4.3 billion, of which 208 applications were approved for a total of $2.7 billion.

What sanctions will Russia face in 90 days?

Additional sanctions against Russia could be imposed after three months if the Russian government does not agree to provide guarantees against the use of chemical weapons. Considering that Russia does not consider itself involved in the poisoning of the Skripals, a scenario in which Russia would agree to give the United States some kind of guarantees seems unlikely.

The second set of sanctions consists of six possible measures, from which the US President must choose at least three. Of these, two measures are symbolic in nature and have no practical significance for Russia (blocking international financial assistance and prohibiting American banks from providing loans to Russian authorities), one is diplomatic (downgrading the status of bilateral diplomatic relations) and the other three have potentially serious consequences for the economy and business, but they don’t have to be applied (since three out of six measures are enough). This is a complete ban on the export of goods from the United States (except for food and agricultural products), a complete ban on imports into the United States and a ban on air traffic with the United States for state-owned air carriers (in the case of Russia, this is Aeroflot). But the United States does not intend to ban Aeroflot flights, no longer.

Aeroflot's quotes initially suffered greatly: on Thursday morning they collapsed from 111.9 to 102.8 rubles, and at their minimum (at 10:29 Moscow time) their price was 98.8 rubles. (minus 12%). Then the airline's quotes recovered from the fall - at 17:11 Moscow time, one share of Aeroflot costs only 0.6% cheaper than the day before.

Sanctions imposed under the Chemical Weapons Act last for at least a year and can be lifted by the President of the United States if the state against which they were imposed provides guarantees of further non-use of chemical weapons, allows in international inspectors, and also compensates for the damage suffered by victims of the use of chemical weapons.

MOSCOW, July 26 – RIA Novosti. In the near future, the United States may introduce the largest sanctions against Russia since 2014.

The House of Representatives passed the corresponding bill, now it’s up to the Senate and President Donald Trump. White House has already made it clear that he generally supports the document.

RIA Novosti got acquainted with the text of the bill and found out how its adoption threatens Russia.

Against whom

According to the document, those involved in “Russian cyber attacks” against the United States, and also associated with human rights violations and corruption in Russia, will be subject to sanctions. Persons doing business with Russian intelligence and the defense sector.

In addition, restrictions will apply to those who invest more than ten million dollars or facilitate such investments if the investments help Russia privatize state assets for the illegal enrichment of government officials, their families and loved ones.

Separately, sanctions are highlighted against those who export or provide Syria with significant financial, material or technological assistance, which would allow Damascus to develop weapons of mass destruction, ballistic or cruise missiles, and receive a large number of conventional weapons.

Measures have also been prescribed against the Russian oil sector, including against those who cooperate with Moscow on pipeline construction projects, as well as restrictions on interaction with Russian financial institutions.

What are we talking about?

American legislators have come up with many punishments for Russia. For example, they tighten earlier measures taken in connection with the situation around Crimea and Ukraine.

Thus, the bill will oblige the US Treasury to prohibit transactions and lending to the Russian financial sector with a maturity of more than 14 days. For the Russian energy sector, this limitation will be 60 days.

American lawmakers intend to ban the supply of equipment and technology for new deep-sea or Arctic shelf projects in Russia if citizens or companies subject to sanctions have relations with them.

Also, American banks may be prohibited from issuing loans and credits in the amount of more than ten million dollars in 12 months to persons subject to sanctions. Trump will also be able to "order U.S. governors at international financial institutions to vote against loans to sanctioned individuals."

Will have American President and the power to prohibit the U.S. Federal Reserve from designating or renewing the designation of sanctioned financial institutions as primary dealers in U.S. debt instruments. In addition, such financial institutions will not be used to hold US Government funds.

“The President may, within the jurisdiction of the United States, prohibit any transfers of loans or payments between financial institutions affecting the interests of sanctioned persons,” the bill states.

Investments and purchases of significant equity interests or debt instruments of sanctioned persons are also potentially prohibited. The US government will not be able to enter into deals with them for the purchase of goods and services.

In many cases, the assets of those subject to sanctions are frozen in the United States and restrictions are placed on their entry into the country.

Congressmen are for

The House of Representatives passed the bill on Tuesday night Moscow time. 419 congressmen voted for the document, and three voted against.

Next, the document must be considered by the Senate and then signed by the President. The Senate voted for it last month, but the first version of the bill had to be finalized. The new sanctions, if adopted, could become the largest and most comprehensive since the beginning of 2014.

The White House made it clear that it generally supports the document, which provides for a serious limitation of the powers of the head of state in the matter of adopting and, accordingly, lifting sanctions. Thus, it includes a clause obliging the president to coordinate in advance with legislators any easing or lifting of restrictions.

The Kremlin said it has an “extremely negative” assessment of the bill, which undermines Russian-American relations. The Foreign Ministry emphasized that the Congress primarily harms America itself, undermining the country’s authority and trust in it. At the same time, in the context of growing sanctions pressure, Moscow has fewer and fewer common topics for discussion with the American side.

The United States and the European Union reacted negatively to the plans, since one of the provisions of the document implies restrictive measures against Russian energy projects, including in Europe.

The document is being considered against the backdrop of a large-scale campaign in the United States to investigate “Russian interference” in the elections (which Moscow categorically denies) and an investigation into “Russian connections” around President Donald Trump (which the head of state’s entourage categorically denies). In addition, the measures proposed in the bill are consistent with the policy of the current US administration to conquer the European energy market under the banner of ensuring its energy security. The latter means, first of all, the elimination of Russia, the main supplier of energy resources to the EU countries and a competitor of the United States, from this market.

Sanctions against Russia have become the trigger for many events in the economy and politics of Russia and other countries. What is the reason, essence and role of sanctions?

The history of the recent sanctions against Russia

After the memorable Maidan event of 2014 in Ukraine, the political situation around the world began to rapidly transform. Until this moment, there were no pronounced disagreements between the Russian Federation and other states, or they were of a completely familiar working nature. But in 2014, Maidan occurred, and Ukraine came under the control of a group of people who began to build an exclusively pro-Western policy for the country, which ultimately resulted in many troubles for Russia, including anti-Russian sanctions from the United States and many other countries.

Most people in Ukraine in 2014 were not ready to accept such changes. And quite expectedly, protest sentiments began to rise in many regions, especially the southeast, as well as in Crimea. These initiatives were actively supported by pro-Russian politicians, especially deputies of the presidential Party of Regions.

Russian politicians also played a significant role in creating resistance to the Kyiv authorities, who began to actively promote the ideas of an uprising of the Russian population of Ukraine against the political regime established there.

First, this resulted in the separation of Crimea (see) with the holding of a referendum for independence and joining Russia, and then in a full-scale war in the South-East of the country (Donetsk and Lugansk regions), where after the same referendums joining the Russian Federation did not happen.

In 2014-2015, a full-scale war broke out in Donbass using all possible types of weapons. The Ukrainian side stated that it was fighting separatism and the desire of Russian-backed forces to separate part of the country; Russia claimed that there was civil war and she has nothing to do with it.

The reaction of the world community was expressed in the form of sanctions

As a result, the world community, led by the United States and Europe, clearly sided with Ukraine and began to introduce economic and political barriers and restrictions against the Russian Federation. In the eyes of the leaders of these countries, anti-Russian economic sanctions have become the main instrument of pressure on Russia so that it stops allegedly sponsoring separatism in Ukraine and providing military assistance to the Donbass militias.

Since the beginning of the introduction of bans, sanctions have only expanded and now, in 2018, they have already reached a very serious level. Since the beginning of 2018, more and more new restrictions have simply rained down on Russia, which should affect vital areas of the economy. The essence of anti-Russian sanctions is pressure on the country’s foreign policy pursued by the President of the Russian Federation.

Interesting fact : one of the episodes of the war that played against the Russian Federation was Malaysia Airlines, where about 300 peaceful European tourists died. According to one version, the civilian Boeing was shot down by accident during hostilities. This incident was also used as a reason for serious restrictive measures against the country. According to the governments of the United States and a number of EU countries, it was Russia that provided the rebels with the Buk air defense system, with which the plane was shot down.

US sanctions in force in 2018

The first to introduce various bans and restrictions against the Russian Federation were the United States. Here she began to develop long lists that included various individuals and companies involved in the situation in eastern Ukraine and allegedly financing and supporting separatism. Later, especially in 2018, the matter took on a much larger scale and problems began to be created even for people and companies that had nothing to do with the aggravation in Ukraine.

The initial reason for introducing anti-Russian sanctions by America was stated as follows: it is a condemnation of Russia’s actions in Crimea, its support for the separatist movement in the Southeast, as well as a significant incentive to stop the so-called Russian aggression. The Russian Federation has received clear claims - it must comply international law and laws, act within the framework of the Budapest Memorandum, completely stop shaking the situation in Ukraine and move on to a constructive dialogue with it to resolve the current situation. Later, the requirements were added to the need to comply with the Minsk agreements, multiple ceasefires, etc.

When Donald Trump took office, anti-Russian sanctions increased significantly, although their reasons remained the same. A flurry of new restrictions followed in 2018. But now their emphasis has shifted significantly - the United States first saw that its previous sanctions actions had not had much success and decided to hit right in the heart - at the immediate circle of President V.V. Putin.

Restrictions against individuals and legal entities

Anti-Russian sanctions 2018 included restrictions against large quantity individuals (more than 200) and legal entities (several dozen) and their list is constantly growing. The tactics of the American side are now simple - to put pressure on the oligarchs and leading companies of the country in order to cause displeasure among the elite with the actions of Vladimir Putin and begin to put pressure on him in order to change the features of foreign policy.

The implementation of anti-Russian sanctions is strictly controlled by employees of the US Treasury, so no concessions or easing can be expected in the near future.

In the photo: Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump

Trump also took a clear position - the Russian Federation must change its behavior and stop supporting separatism, return Crimea to Ukraine and leave the South-East. Only after this will it be possible to talk about some kind of positive dialogue and rectification of the situation, as swissinfo.ch reports.

Russia's counter-sanctions in response to sanctions

Since the consequences of anti-Russian sanctions for Russia are quite painful, no one is going to leave the question of an adequate response unattended. Just the other day, the State Duma adopted a law providing for America. Their essence is as follows:

• President Vladimir Putin may impose restrictions or bans on interaction with certain unfriendly countries or companies;
• There may be restrictions on the export and import of raw materials and various products;
• Many Western companies will now not be able to take part in the processes of privatization and government procurement.

After introducing another list of restrictions, along with which the ruble exchange rate weakened significantly, the United States assessed the effect of anti-Russian sanctions as very positive and effective.

Interesting fact: Among deputies, the option of banning the import of about 1,000 types of imported medical drugs (except for those that are indispensable!) is being seriously discussed. Many people are wary of this decision and expect higher prices and shortages in pharmacies. We can only hope for domestic manufacturers and analogues from other friendly countries.

It is important to understand that the European Union is moving in the wake of the United States on this issue and is largely acting against its goals, ambitions and benefits. Any friction with the Russian Federation is fraught with serious consequences for European countries, increased prices for gas and oil products, a decrease in their own sales markets, etc.

Nevertheless, America’s influence here is so great that most EU countries also introduced a package of anti-Russian sanctions against the Russian Federation, also in connection with the Ukrainian events: the secession of Crimea and the war in Donbass.

European anti-Russian sanctions, a list of which is available even on Wikipedia, affect the majority of the country's elite, people involved in supporting the separatist movement in Crimea and the South-East, owners of large companies, politicians, military men, and businessmen.

Here are just a few famous people and enterprises affected by anti-Russian sanctions:

• Sergey Naryshkin;
• Valentina Matvienko;
• Dmitry Rogozin;
• Ramzan Kadyrov;
• Dmitry Kiselev;
• Vyacheslav Volodin and many others.

The list of companies includes:

• "Feodosia";
• "Dobrolet";
• "Almaz-Antey";
• "Kerch Sea Trade Port";
• Gazprom Neft;
• Rosneft and others.

In total, the EU anti-Russian sanctions affected 150 individuals and 38 large companies. .

As for retaliatory measures, the main counter-sanction in the European Union was a ban on the import of a large list of products food industry. At the same time, a national import substitution program was announced, as a result of which domestic producers must make up for the deficit that arose with the ban on the import of goods. Such measures are aimed at supporting Russian manufacturer and gaining independence from Western products. In general, the program worked successfully and there was no food shortage in the country.

Recently, Trump and Merkel discussed anti-Russian sanctions and promised to continue to adhere to such a policy until the political goals they set are completed. Also, Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany, has more than once expressed her opinion on anti-Russian sanctions, considering them harmful for a normal partnership, but necessary V at the moment.

Interesting fact: the main reason for anti-Russian sanctions by the EU is, after all, US pressure, since our parties are vitally interested in interaction and normal relations.

In the photo: Vladimir Putin and Angela Merkel

As the most affected party, Ukraine also considered it its duty to introduce a number of restrictions against Russian enterprises and many individuals. The specificity here is that for a given country, any new anti-Russian sanctions are most often a shot in the foot, since the post-Soviet economies are tightly interconnected and until recently were one.

It is difficult to find companies in the Russian Federation that would suffer too much from Ukrainian restrictions, but in Ukraine almost any large enterprise, serious production and even the work of scientific institutes were more focused on interaction with the Russian Federation. As a result, judging purely politically, restrictions have been introduced and everything appears to be happening according to the logic of events, but it is mainly Ukrainian enterprises and citizens of this country who suffer from this.

Trade turnover between states has decreased at a record level, and there is nowhere to put surplus Ukrainian products - Europe does not need them, it has plenty of its own, local people do not have the money to buy it. As a result, the domestic market and Ukrainian production only suffer and gradually degrade. Every Kiev bill on anti-Russian sanctions means anxiety and a suspended situation for hundreds of enterprises and millions of workers who already receive pittance salaries.

The impact of anti-Russian sanctions on Ukraine is very negative, however, the list of companies and individuals affected by them is simply huge.

In the photo: Petro Poroshenko and Arseniy Yatsenyuk

Russia's response to Ukrainian sanctions

Russia's response is not as aggressive, but it exists and has affected a large number of companies. As stated above, the overwhelming majority of Ukrainian prohibition measures themselves are shooting themselves in the foot, arm and whole body, so even if there was no answer, the Ukrainian economy is already rapidly degrading and losing even the semblance of a civilized country. Vivid confirmation of what has been said: the country is among the 5 poorest in the world, about 100,000 people come from here every month. If support for anti-Russian sanctions continues, then it is obvious that its results will be even more disastrous.

Responsibility for compliance with anti-Russian sanctions

Most recently, State Duma deputies adopted a law that provides . This anti-Russian sanctions law stipulates that every individual or legal entity, which refuses to perform its usual functions within the country for fear of falling under Western restrictions, may be mistaken for a pest and brought to criminal liability. These measures were proposed by deputies, not Putin, but it is obvious that anti-Russian sanctions in connection with him should be less painful and noticeable.

As for punishment, violation of the law is subject to arrest for 4 years or a fine of 600,000 rubles. But other variations are possible here. The law is still very “raw” and it is difficult to discuss it more specifically. Also, at the moment there are no precedents for its use.

As a conclusion, we note that the new US anti-Russian sanctions are a painful blow, but it will not go unanswered and the country’s authorities have responded at the legislative level. Anti-Russian sanctions today are primarily political and they must also be fought in the political arena.