Reducing relations with Russia and imposing sanctions is not enough to secure interests of Washington, but the United States is implementing a mechanism that can directly manage and monitor the process of economic cooperation between Russia and Europe.
Pak Sahafat News Agency International Group Report, the tool of US sanctions is one of the most important issues in the current crisis in Ukraine, which has attracted the attention of most analysts around the world. Whether or not countries join Washington’s campaign against Russia is a clear and definite criterion for examining the effectiveness of sanctions.
In this memo, Mikael, director of the village, a researcher on Central Eurasian issues, examines the US use of the Ukraine crisis and how the sanctions tool works.
It has been more than a month since Russia’s military presence on Ukrainian soil, and the war seems to be still time-consuming. Western countries, led by the United States, have been trying to impose economic sanctions on Russia since day one. In general, the quickest US response to sanctions is to freeze the target country’s assets, which are identified and enforced by the Treasury Department. US Treasury Secretary Janet El Yellen called the announced sanctions an unprecedented move that would limit Russia’s ability to finance its activities. This unprecedented move somehow reflects the extent of the sanctions imposed.
The main purpose of this memo is to analyze how the United States can make the most of the Ukraine crisis. Also, how important is the media and the direction of world public opinion, using different methods as elements of a hybrid war, how it will work for Washington.
In order to understand the significance of the issue in a short context, at least in relation to the Ukraine crisis, an attempt is made to ask the question “Are sanctions in the new era a very effective tool for the United States?” He pondered more.
Why is the United States not content with just financial and economic sanctions?
There is a big gap between sanctions for humanitarian purposes and sanctions for American purposes. Certainly the tool of sanctions for American purposes is like moving a train without rails! Because the crisis in Ukraine is a great threat to all countries of the world, especially European countries to provide their energy resources and some countries to provide the food they need, such as wheat. So, here are two issues that stand out for Europe and some North African countries like Egypt, the Russian threat or the Ukrainian crisis threat?
Of course, for Europe, the Russian threat, however permanent, is tolerable and even solvable at times. That is, Europe, especially France and Germany, can provide a mechanism in which to continue cooperating with Russia. But it has not been and cannot be tolerated by a country that is undoubtedly the United States; Of course, the British government can also be placed next to the United States. For at least a decade, US officials have tried to emphasize that Russia is a major threat to Europe, but many European countries have been able to reduce Russian threats to some extent by considering alternative platforms.
Thus, it can be analyzed that the Washington authorities were looking for a situation in which to present Russia in a new threatening format and with more horrible standards in a way that forces European countries to give up their most basic national interests, even at the cost of economic collapse and severe inflation.
Read more:
The United States has succeeded in presenting Russia as a clear threat by the new standards. But it has also failed to convince interested countries that Russia’s threat in the pre-war Ukraine was greater than it is now. This means that for most European countries it is possible to cooperate with Russia, and if the war in Ukraine continues in the form of negotiations and the parties reach a stable situation, we can again count on cooperation with Russia, not in terms of mutual trust, but In terms of the interdependence that has developed in the field of energy cooperation.
So in the analysis of Europeans, especially Germany, France, Hungary, Serbia and even Austria, the threat of Russia in a stable and non-war state is more tolerable than the crisis in Ukraine and its continuation. Russia is a threat to most European countries in any case, but the type and severity of the threat in times of crisis is different from normal.
One can therefore speculate as to why Washington is not content with its only effective tool, financial and economic sanctions. The answer is that reducing US relations with Russia is not enough to put pressure on Moscow and secure Washington’s interests alone, rather, the United States should be able to directly manage and oversee the process of economic cooperation between Russia and Europe, especially in the field of energy, including oil and gas. This goal can only be achieved if Washington is able to bring countries like Germany under pressure. Even if these countries do not cooperate, they can be coerced by concentrating world public opinion and using combined warfare. Certainly, the Ukraine crisis is and will be a good prey for these goals of Washington.
But one side of this story is definitely foreign and multinational companies that play a decisive role in the current interactions of the world. The question is whether foreign companies also give ethical reasons for leaving Russia or whether their non-exit is due to financial losses.
Under what circumstances do companies leave Russia?
US financial sanctions, the process of transactions, payments and transfers in Russia face so many obstacles that companies operating in the country are no longer willing to continue working in Russia because most of them do not want to be affected by financial hostilities. The answer is clear, these companies did not come to the Russian market for humanitarian and benevolent purposes, and naturally a better market and higher profits are the main motivators of their activities. But it is also worth noting that they do not leave the Russian market for humanitarian purposes either.
 It is true that the crisis in Ukraine is not to the satisfaction of the people of the world. War is a phenomenon that every human being opposes, especially human beings who have seen its terrible and irreparable consequences. But the reality is that most international businesses look at war and crisis in opposition to, or even support for, other approaches. So it’s very different for most companies in Russia to leave the Russian market for really ethical reasons or to leave because of fears of sanctions and financial losses. Companies certainly raise two questions; first, can they continue to make a profit in Russia? Second, if they make a profit, can they take it out and transfer it?
Of course, in the meantime, some companies may have really left Russia for ethical reasons. The important point is the US weapon to put pressure on countries, specifically international and multinational corporations. A weapon that has become the tool of this country to advance its policies and double standards in the face of various international crises. But if, for whatever reason, it is profitable for a foreign company to continue operating in Russia and to be able to stay in the Russian market, here is another similar restriction imposed by Washington, and that is a combined war to discredit companies and corporations.
Thus, there is a certain transparency in terms of adapting the existing conditions to the mentalities, which can be understood with a little attention. In any case, the instrument of sanctions is an effective tool for the United States, but in the new era, it cannot achieve the goals of the United States alone, but must be critical in order to use it to direct the interests of countries in line with their own interests.