Does anyone know how much damage we are collectively doing to the Russian economy and how long Putin will put up with it before he acts / is ousted?
Wondering if the economic position is more of a threat to him than the growing military failure / escalation.
Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising had a conventional WWIII triggered when economic catastrophe inside the Soviet Union forced them to attack to try and secure more resources - 'do it now whilst we still can'. I wonder if our successful trashing of Russian economic capabilities might not drive a similar lunatic decision.
Not that I think we should stop doing so. I'm just curious.
Sanctions can fail at either end: Either they do so much damage Putin decides to blow up the world, or they do a lot of damage, but the regime is able to protect the people it needs to protect, and put the blame on the enemy rather than himself (which shouldn't be too hard since destroying the Russian economy is the express goal of the western policy).
It would be nice to think damaging the economy would get rid of the leader and the problem would go away but I can't think of a single case where anything like that has happened, out of the many times it's been tried. (South Africa, possibly, dunno?)
Does anyone know how much damage we are collectively doing to the Russian economy and how long Putin will put up with it before he acts / is ousted?
Wondering if the economic position is more of a threat to him than the growing military failure / escalation.
Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising had a conventional WWIII triggered when economic catastrophe inside the Soviet Union forced them to attack to try and secure more resources - 'do it now whilst we still can'. I wonder if our successful trashing of Russian economic capabilities might not drive a similar lunatic decision.
Not that I think we should stop doing so. I'm just curious.
The US economic sanctions of Cuba, have been in place for over 50 years, and do not seem to have dislodged it leader, IMHO at this stage they are helping the leadership who can use them as an excuse for economic hardship at home and blame it on the nasty outsides and tell there people that why they should all rally around the leadership.
hopefully the economic sanctions in place on Russia now, will make the people realise that something impotent is happening, question state propergada share story's and maybe video from Ukraine, then protest and overthought Putin.
If that does not happen, in the relatedly short time. then these sanctions may be counterproductive. Is a population without iPhones more or less likely to see videos of the destruction of Kyiv?
Sberbank, largest bank in Russia, has essentially collapsed. It’s exiting Europe because it has insufficient liquidity to meet its obligations. It’s equity trades on the LSE via ADRs but is now trading at one cent.
Meanwhile banks that trade the RUB are facing chaos. Margin calls out to clients that can’t / won’t be paid, no realistic ability to hedge any long RUB positions of any size and insufficient liquidity for trades to even settle. As for anyone daft enough to have agreed to finance Russian securities through reverse repos…
On the commodities side, there was a pre-invasion assumption that Urals crude would be diverted to China. About 5mm bbls a day. But something is going wrong. Whether that’s a shipping issue or a trade finance issue I’m not sure. But Urals crude is suddenly toxic waste. Reportedly Trafigura marketed a cargo at an $18 discount to Brent and didn’t receive a single bid.
When *Trafigura* can't make a profit of your shit.....
When it comes to Urals crude I think the issue will be fears that delivery may not be possible so why take the risk.
But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?
I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.
He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.
Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.
The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.
I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.
My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.
He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.
He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.
...and bankrupted.
Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.
The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.
The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.
I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.
But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
Been having a bit of a refresher on population movements in Eastern Europe and South Russia post 1939, and especially post 1944. Absolutely massive; complete depopulation of areas and repopulation with people moved from elsewhere.
Khrushchev claimed that he stopped Stalin from deporting the entire ethnic Ukrainian population to Siberia, IIRC.
But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?
I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.
He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.
Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.
The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.
I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.
My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.
He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.
He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.
He spent two decades trying to rebuild Russia. And undid that in two weeks.
Russia is a trashed brand, whatever happens next.
It's finished. It will become a minor player in world affairs. In the end, it won't even be able to afford to service its nukes, and when they go, it will fragment into an inconsequential little nation.
If they give up the nukes quietly they might be allowed to live comfortably into an untroubled future. If they set them off, they will cause universal havoc, but the world won't end. Russia will.
This is silly. Russia is a great power. By sheer dint of its geographic size and resources - and a still huge population. 145m people
It has a long, remarkable history. It has waned and waxed as an empire. It’s culture is profound - great literature, music, art, architecture
The idea it is going to become some trivial Slavic Belgium or an impoverished Denmark is daft. It has survived insane leaders before and it will survive Mad Putin (unless he nukes the world) and it will still be a great power
Ironically, climate change means Russia’s economic future is probably rather bright. Once they get over this present disaster
Russia is not a great power.
It has an economy poorer than Italy's, is Italy a great power? It has a population smaller than Nigeria's, is Nigeria a great power?
It was a great power, once. That's in its history now, and Putin has shown that to the world. The days of Russia as a great power to be feared are over now.
Except that they have a lot of resources under Siberia, and in terms of the balance between powers, in the medium to long term, climate change is to their advantage.
But I agree, in terms of immediate power both hard and soft, Putin's miscalculation has hobbled themselves considerably for the foreseeable.
Plenty of countries have natural resources that they export, that doesn't make them great powers though.
But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?
I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.
He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.
Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.
The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.
I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.
My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.
He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.
He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.
...and bankrupted.
Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.
The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.
The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.
I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.
But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
Difficult to see Ukraine agreeing to cede an inch after this, isn't it? If Russia does get and keep parts, I doubt their possession of them will have much international recognition. Will it have been worth the degree to which he will have damaged the Russian economy and solidified hostility to and distrust of Russia throughout the world?
I did not say it was worth it.
The Republic of Northern Cyprus has endured all my lifetime. I suspect a de facto partition of Ukraine will endure.
Eventually, everyone moves on.
The Rep of N Cyprus is, I believe, a popular holiday destination.
Sberbank, largest bank in Russia, has essentially collapsed. It’s exiting Europe because it has insufficient liquidity to meet its obligations. It’s equity trades on the LSE via ADRs but is now trading at one cent.
Meanwhile banks that trade the RUB are facing chaos. Margin calls out to clients that can’t / won’t be paid, no realistic ability to hedge any long RUB positions of any size and insufficient liquidity for trades to even settle. As for anyone daft enough to have agreed to finance Russian securities through reverse repos…
On the commodities side, there was a pre-invasion assumption that Urals crude would be diverted to China. About 5mm bbls a day. But something is going wrong. Whether that’s a shipping issue or a trade finance issue I’m not sure. But Urals crude is suddenly toxic waste. Reportedly Trafigura marketed a cargo at an $18 discount to Brent and didn’t receive a single bid.
When *Trafigura* can't make a profit of your shit.....
When it comes to Urals crude I think the issue will be fears that delivery may not be possible so why take the risk.
That plus reputational risk, payments & sanctions.
Would you want to be the one explaining to the board about why the company is being fucked by the entire US Justice Dept. because you bought some Russian crude?
What I am interested in is the way that the big companies have complied with sanctions, written off huge loses and there is not even a murmur in the market about it.
Russia got caught doping so they had the 'not Russian, honest' flag. Now their country has invaded Ukraine and they've got an Olympic 'super duper not Russian, honest' flag.
Ahead of tomorrow’s Birmingham Erdington by-election to replace the late Jack Dromey, GB News has unearthed footage of Labour candidate Paulette Hamilton appearing to question the value of democracy and considering “an uprising” to “get what we want“.
According to GB News, a Labour Party spokesperson this morning said:
“Paulette Hamilton is arguing for better representation for the black community in public life and as she is campaigning to become Birmingham’s first black MP she has a point.”
You could have mentioned that the clip was from 2015, but chose not to, I guess. We always see this mud-raking from the distant past now, on all sides.
I think Putin did a Ratner on the brand with his speech a couple of days before the invasion. The actual invasion proved he meant it. Difficult to see how the brand can recover with him in charge.
Do we have any polling on it? The thing about authoritarian nationalists is that their messages are tuned to the people in their own country whose support they need, and they don't care what they sound like to anybody else. Putin definitely looks to *me* like he's ridiculous and slightly mad, but so does Trump, and he managed to win a fair election. I really have no idea how domestic opinion in Russia is responding but we shouldn't assume it just because of how it looks to us, or even to internet-savvy English-speaking Russians.
The US economic sanctions of Cuba, have been in place for over 50 years, and do not seem to have dislodged it leader, IMHO at this stage they are helping the leadership who can use them as an excuse for economic hardship at home and blame it on the nasty outsides and tell there people that why they should all rally around the leadership.
That's a message that will play very well in Russia. Imagine a persecution complex that is Brexiteer to the power of Scouser and that's Russia...
Does anyone know how much damage we are collectively doing to the Russian economy and how long Putin will put up with it before he acts / is ousted?
Wondering if the economic position is more of a threat to him than the growing military failure / escalation.
Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising had a conventional WWIII triggered when economic catastrophe inside the Soviet Union forced them to attack to try and secure more resources - 'do it now whilst we still can'. I wonder if our successful trashing of Russian economic capabilities might not drive a similar lunatic decision.
Not that I think we should stop doing so. I'm just curious.
The US economic sanctions of Cuba, have been in place for over 50 years, and do not seem to have dislodged it leader, IMHO at this stage they are helping the leadership who can use them as an excuse for economic hardship at home and blame it on the nasty outsides and tell there people that why they should all rally around the leadership.
hopefully the economic sanctions in place on Russia now, will make the people realise that something impotent is happening, question state propergada share story's and maybe video from Ukraine, then protest and overthought Putin.
If that does not happen, in the relatedly short time. then these sanctions may be counterproductive. Is a population without iPhones more or less likely to see videos of the destruction of Kyiv?
We've never seen sanctions like this before. In my past, I've seen plenty of Cuba deals cross my desk, as Europe doesn't apply sanctions there. I've seen Libya trade finance deals mirrored through Turkey, Iranian through India and even North Korean through China. But this is the real deal now.
But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?
I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.
He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.
Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.
The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.
I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.
My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.
He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.
He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.
...and bankrupted.
Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.
The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.
The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.
I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.
But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
Been having a bit of a refresher on population movements in Eastern Europe and South Russia post 1939, and especially post 1944. Absolutely massive; complete depopulation of areas and repopulation with people moved from elsewhere.
Khrushchev claimed that he stopped Stalin from deporting the entire ethnic Ukrainian population to Siberia, IIRC.
Can believe that; the Ukrainians weren't the most reliable defenders of the Great Soviet Fatherland. Was that why he sent a lot to what was until then S. Poland? To put them right on the fringes.
Russia got caught doping so they had the 'not Russian, honest' flag. Now their country has invaded Ukraine and they've got an Olympic 'super duper not Russian, honest' flag.
It is being reported that they'll lose their kit, their flag, their anthem, and won't appear in the medals table. Holding a handful of paralympic athletes who are already out there ready to compete, personally responsible, seems harsh. After all, any of them with sufficient qualification to switch to another national team could easily do so; the argument is with Russia, not individuals. Team sports - where the team collectively represent their country - are a different matter.
Does anyone know how much damage we are collectively doing to the Russian economy and how long Putin will put up with it before he acts / is ousted?
Wondering if the economic position is more of a threat to him than the growing military failure / escalation.
Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising had a conventional WWIII triggered when economic catastrophe inside the Soviet Union forced them to attack to try and secure more resources - 'do it now whilst we still can'. I wonder if our successful trashing of Russian economic capabilities might not drive a similar lunatic decision.
Not that I think we should stop doing so. I'm just curious.
Sanctions can fail at either end: Either they do so much damage Putin decides to blow up the world, or they do a lot of damage, but the regime is able to protect the people it needs to protect, and put the blame on the enemy rather than himself (which shouldn't be too hard since destroying the Russian economy is the express goal of the western policy).
It would be nice to think damaging the economy would get rid of the leader and the problem would go away but I can't think of a single case where anything like that has happened, out of the many times it's been tried. (South Africa, possibly, dunno?)
Sanctions didn't end Apartheid - the end of the Cold War did. Though sanctions made things difficult.
The majority of the white population was increasingly unhappy with the system. They kept going with it because of the threat of Communism/African Dictatorships. "Better us than the Commies and lunatic warlords".....
Once the threat of communism collapse, the ANC turned itself into a Social Democratic party etc and there was a general outbreak of democracy in Africa, the last threadbare pair of pants the system had were gone...
EDIT: The current sanctions against Russia are far wider and deeper than any tried on South Africa.
She’s holding up, thanks for asking. Her father is safe, but extended family and friends are all over the place in both countries, with the full spectrum of views on the conflict.
No problem. Don't have a lot else to do sitting here waiting for my legs to be put back together when it dawn on me she was Ukrainian (operation now tomorrow)
Good to know that as far as you know people are well.
My neighbour is Russian and I suspect I am not going to broach the subject. She is very nice but has a very dry sense of humour so it can be very difficult to judge sometime if she is annoyed or messing with me. So far it has always been the latter. I don't want to misjudge that on such a sensitive topic.
Russia got caught doping so they had the 'not Russian, honest' flag. Now their country has invaded Ukraine and they've got an Olympic 'super duper not Russian, honest' flag.
I liked that, but it seems they're being excluded from the medal table. That does seem like a serious change, which the rebrand of Russia to a different name that still ranked on the medal table didn't have.
Ahead of tomorrow’s Birmingham Erdington by-election to replace the late Jack Dromey, GB News has unearthed footage of Labour candidate Paulette Hamilton appearing to question the value of democracy and considering “an uprising” to “get what we want“.
According to GB News, a Labour Party spokesperson this morning said:
“Paulette Hamilton is arguing for better representation for the black community in public life and as she is campaigning to become Birmingham’s first black MP she has a point.”
You could have mentioned that the clip was from 2015, but chose not to, I guess. We always see this mud-raking from the distant past now, on all sides.
You think that matters? She had been a councillor for 11 years by then:
Does anyone know how much damage we are collectively doing to the Russian economy and how long Putin will put up with it before he acts / is ousted?
Wondering if the economic position is more of a threat to him than the growing military failure / escalation.
Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising had a conventional WWIII triggered when economic catastrophe inside the Soviet Union forced them to attack to try and secure more resources - 'do it now whilst we still can'. I wonder if our successful trashing of Russian economic capabilities might not drive a similar lunatic decision.
Not that I think we should stop doing so. I'm just curious.
The US economic sanctions of Cuba, have been in place for over 50 years, and do not seem to have dislodged it leader, IMHO at this stage they are helping the leadership who can use them as an excuse for economic hardship at home and blame it on the nasty outsides and tell there people that why they should all rally around the leadership.
hopefully the economic sanctions in place on Russia now, will make the people realise that something impotent is happening, question state propergada share story's and maybe video from Ukraine, then protest and overthought Putin.
If that does not happen, in the relatedly short time. then these sanctions may be counterproductive. Is a population without iPhones more or less likely to see videos of the destruction of Kyiv?
Agreed. Sanctions need to target the decision makers, not oligarchs or the man on the St Petersburg omnibus. Putin will always be able to get hold of caviar for his breakfast even if the supermarkets are out of cornflakes. Some sanctions even seem close to giving Russia free money by handing over joint assets.
Sberbank, largest bank in Russia, has essentially collapsed. It’s exiting Europe because it has insufficient liquidity to meet its obligations. It’s equity trades on the LSE via ADRs but is now trading at one cent.
Meanwhile banks that trade the RUB are facing chaos. Margin calls out to clients that can’t / won’t be paid, no realistic ability to hedge any long RUB positions of any size and insufficient liquidity for trades to even settle. As for anyone daft enough to have agreed to finance Russian securities through reverse repos…
On the commodities side, there was a pre-invasion assumption that Urals crude would be diverted to China. About 5mm bbls a day. But something is going wrong. Whether that’s a shipping issue or a trade finance issue I’m not sure. But Urals crude is suddenly toxic waste. Reportedly Trafigura marketed a cargo at an $18 discount to Brent and didn’t receive a single bid.
When *Trafigura* can't make a profit of your shit.....
When it comes to Urals crude I think the issue will be fears that delivery may not be possible so why take the risk.
That plus reputational risk, payments & sanctions.
Would you want to be the one explaining to the board about why the company is being fucked by the entire US Justice Dept. because you bought some Russian crude?
What I am interested in is the way that the big companies have complied with sanctions, written off huge loses and there is not even a murmur in the market about it.
The reputational issue is massive but finding boats willing to accept Russian crude is going to be part of it. Europe politically may be wavering about stopping taking molecules of Russia hydrocarbons because of their dependence. But at a corporate level firms are gold-plating the sanctions, as too much hassle and too much risk. And beyond Europe, other countries can afford to be more choosy about what they are willing to buy. Goodness knows what another week of this does on the streets of Moscow and corridors in the Kremlin.
But does Putin want one? I do worry that we've driven sanctions to the maximum already, leaving little incentive for Putin not to go the whole hog and simply occupy the country. It'd be quite mad to want to occupy an entire, largely hostile, country, but thinking Putin wasn't mad is what made me think he wouldn't invade at all, so who knows?
I think Putin is motivated by his historico-philosophical fantasy.
He wants the lands back that he believes historically belong to Russia, so not the whole of the present-day Ukraine.
Of course, Western Ukraine was never part of historic Russia. He wants the Black Sea coast and the lands east of the Dneiper.
The question is whether he could occupy and keep those parts of the country. That depends on how much the rest of Russia shares his vision & are willing to accept the pain.
I think Putin's view of history is quite common amongst Russians.
I think this is probably right. Unfortunately not sure what is going to prevent it. He's already annexed Crimea and turned Belarus into a puppet.
My belief FWIW is that Putin is most interested in his legacy. Sees himself in the tradition of Stalin and the more consequential Tsars.
He found Mother Russia: weak, diminished, despised.
He left Mother Russia: strong, enlarged, feared.
...and bankrupted.
Well, yes. But I really don't think Putin is bothered much by economic pain, or any other form of pain for that matter. Russia will endure. It's not as though Moscow or St Petersburg are being invested, and they survived that a few times.
The point is that the map has changed. Russia will, quite literally, be bigger. And that is likely to be a keeper.
Once Ukraine has been divided, then (as in Cyprus) the populations will re-arrange themselves.
The process will only be accelerated by the accession of rump-Ukraine into the EU (if/when it happens). Because that will lead to still further de-population -- at least if Estonia, Latvia & Lithuania are any guide.
I think Putin might have wanted to swallow all of Ukraine at outset. The strength of the resistance probably makes that very unlikely now.
But the parts of Ukraine that Putin is really interested in, I think he will get & probably keep.
Been having a bit of a refresher on population movements in Eastern Europe and South Russia post 1939, and especially post 1944. Absolutely massive; complete depopulation of areas and repopulation with people moved from elsewhere.
Khrushchev claimed that he stopped Stalin from deporting the entire ethnic Ukrainian population to Siberia, IIRC.
Can believe that; the Ukrainians weren't the most reliable defenders of the Great Soviet Fatherland. Was that why he sent a lot to what was until then S. Poland? To put them right on the fringes.
Maybe.
He certainly did this to the ethic Germans in the USSR. Hence the stories of soldiers coming back, complete with a Hero Of The Soviet Union medal, to be put with their families straight on a train to somewhere.....
Are these the most comprehensive worldwide sanctions ever? If so, they'll be a serious benchmark for the future. If they work then we have a blueprint. If they don't...well that isn't good for our go-to non-military response.
Does anyone know how much damage we are collectively doing to the Russian economy and how long Putin will put up with it before he acts / is ousted?
Wondering if the economic position is more of a threat to him than the growing military failure / escalation.
Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising had a conventional WWIII triggered when economic catastrophe inside the Soviet Union forced them to attack to try and secure more resources - 'do it now whilst we still can'. I wonder if our successful trashing of Russian economic capabilities might not drive a similar lunatic decision.
Not that I think we should stop doing so. I'm just curious.
The US economic sanctions of Cuba, have been in place for over 50 years, and do not seem to have dislodged it leader, IMHO at this stage they are helping the leadership who can use them as an excuse for economic hardship at home and blame it on the nasty outsides and tell there people that why they should all rally around the leadership.
hopefully the economic sanctions in place on Russia now, will make the people realise that something impotent is happening, question state propergada share story's and maybe video from Ukraine, then protest and overthought Putin.
If that does not happen, in the relatedly short time. then these sanctions may be counterproductive. Is a population without iPhones more or less likely to see videos of the destruction of Kyiv?
Agreed. Sanctions need to target the decision makers, not oligarchs or the man on the St Petersburg omnibus. Putin will always be able to get hold of caviar for his breakfast even if the supermarkets are out of cornflakes. Some sanctions even seem close to giving Russia free money by handing over joint assets.
Disagreed, we've "targetted" sanctions for years and it does nothing and they're easily circumvented.
We need to destroy the Russian economy. Unfortunate for their population, but that's the path their dictator has chosen for them.
Either the people rise up and replace their dictator, or they don't but the dictator is left ruling an economic wasteland and he has no power or taxes as a result.
Sberbank, largest bank in Russia, has essentially collapsed. It’s exiting Europe because it has insufficient liquidity to meet its obligations. It’s equity trades on the LSE via ADRs but is now trading at one cent.
Meanwhile banks that trade the RUB are facing chaos. Margin calls out to clients that can’t / won’t be paid, no realistic ability to hedge any long RUB positions of any size and insufficient liquidity for trades to even settle. As for anyone daft enough to have agreed to finance Russian securities through reverse repos…
On the commodities side, there was a pre-invasion assumption that Urals crude would be diverted to China. About 5mm bbls a day. But something is going wrong. Whether that’s a shipping issue or a trade finance issue I’m not sure. But Urals crude is suddenly toxic waste. Reportedly Trafigura marketed a cargo at an $18 discount to Brent and didn’t receive a single bid.
When *Trafigura* can't make a profit of your shit.....
When it comes to Urals crude I think the issue will be fears that delivery may not be possible so why take the risk.
That plus reputational risk, payments & sanctions.
Would you want to be the one explaining to the board about why the company is being fucked by the entire US Justice Dept. because you bought some Russian crude?
What I am interested in is the way that the big companies have complied with sanctions, written off huge loses and there is not even a murmur in the market about it.
The reputational issue is massive but finding boats willing to accept Russian crude is going to be part of it. Europe politically may be wavering about stopping taking molecules of Russia hydrocarbons because of their dependence. But at a corporate level firms are gold-plating the sanctions, as too much hassle and too much risk. And beyond Europe, other countries can afford to be more choosy about what they are willing to buy. Goodness knows what another week of this does on the streets of Moscow and corridors in the Kremlin.
Several bank have stated they won't touch anything by/with/from/to/for/at/near Russia.
Sberbank, largest bank in Russia, has essentially collapsed. It’s exiting Europe because it has insufficient liquidity to meet its obligations. It’s equity trades on the LSE via ADRs but is now trading at one cent.
Meanwhile banks that trade the RUB are facing chaos. Margin calls out to clients that can’t / won’t be paid, no realistic ability to hedge any long RUB positions of any size and insufficient liquidity for trades to even settle. As for anyone daft enough to have agreed to finance Russian securities through reverse repos…
On the commodities side, there was a pre-invasion assumption that Urals crude would be diverted to China. About 5mm bbls a day. But something is going wrong. Whether that’s a shipping issue or a trade finance issue I’m not sure. But Urals crude is suddenly toxic waste. Reportedly Trafigura marketed a cargo at an $18 discount to Brent and didn’t receive a single bid.
When *Trafigura* can't make a profit of your shit.....
When it comes to Urals crude I think the issue will be fears that delivery may not be possible so why take the risk.
That plus reputational risk, payments & sanctions.
Would you want to be the one explaining to the board about why the company is being fucked by the entire US Justice Dept. because you bought some Russian crude?
What I am interested in is the way that the big companies have complied with sanctions, written off huge loses and there is not even a murmur in the market about it.
I think the market sees Russia's new pariah status as a long term issue, not a short term one.
Senior US defense official tells reporters that Russia's 40-mile convoy, advancing on Kyiv, remains where it did yesterday because of: -Ukrainian resistance -Fuel sustainment problems -Running out of food -And the Russians may be regrouping, rethinking, and reevaluating"
I think that’s pretty much all the possible reasons offered by the PB General Staff, so hoora, everyone’s right. Has it even been confirmed that the column is 40 miles long?
Russia got caught doping so they had the 'not Russian, honest' flag. Now their country has invaded Ukraine and they've got an Olympic 'super duper not Russian, honest' flag.
I liked that, but it seems they're being excluded from the medal table. That does seem like a serious change, which the rebrand of Russia to a different name that still ranked on the medal table didn't have.
Steve Hanke @steve_hanke #EconWatch: The war in #Ukraine has shut down Black Sea ports. #Wheat prices have accordingly surged to “limit up”. As long as the war in Ukraine continues, wheat prices will be up, up, and away.
One for @MISTY : https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/ethical-investors-have-weakened-the-west-s-defences "Rewind just a few weeks and much of the City was obsessing over ESG issues. Fund managers were harassing the oil companies to stop developing domestic supplies of gas, even though our failure to do so has increased our dependence on Russia. And critically, they were demonising defence companies on the basis that making weapons was immoral or wrong. Many companies had slowly started winding down their defence units. It was not worth the hassle of trying to justify them to woke fund managers, nor was it worth the damage done to the share price."
Steve Hanke @steve_hanke #EconWatch: The war in #Ukraine has shut down Black Sea ports. #Wheat prices have accordingly surged to “limit up”. As long as the war in Ukraine continues, wheat prices will be up, up, and away.
Ahead of tomorrow’s Birmingham Erdington by-election to replace the late Jack Dromey, GB News has unearthed footage of Labour candidate Paulette Hamilton appearing to question the value of democracy and considering “an uprising” to “get what we want“.
According to GB News, a Labour Party spokesperson this morning said:
“Paulette Hamilton is arguing for better representation for the black community in public life and as she is campaigning to become Birmingham’s first black MP she has a point.”
You could have mentioned that the clip was from 2015, but chose not to, I guess. We always see this mud-raking from the distant past now, on all sides.
You think that matters? She had been a councillor for 11 years by then:
Senior US defense official tells reporters that Russia's 40-mile convoy, advancing on Kyiv, remains where it did yesterday because of: -Ukrainian resistance -Fuel sustainment problems -Running out of food -And the Russians may be regrouping, rethinking, and reevaluating"
I think that’s pretty much all the possible reasons offered by the PB General Staff, so hoora, everyone’s right. Has it even been confirmed that the column is 40 miles long?
Depends how you define length of a single column as opposed to a few different columns of shorter length. When the Selebian family moved north, my wife drove our fiesta up loaded with stuff and picked up the keys to the house while I finished loading the hired van and then followed. We had an approx 100-mile convoy* of Selebian supply vehicles for our assault on the North.
I hate the “it’s all about us” tone of much internet commentary about the crisis but, dipping my toe in, the demands for a NFZ are not going to help Johnson. He can’t do it because the U.K. doesn’t alone have the resources and, well, WW3 but increasingly there are calls from the armchair generals for one. Ultimately, when Kyiv falls and this war turns into Syria redux, a lot of the blame for that will come from said Monday morning quarterbacks and fall on Johnson’s shoulders. He can’t really win.
Please enlighten me on which NATO country disagrees with Boris over no fly zones
When have you heard UVDL, Macron, Biden endorse enforcing no fly zones
You miss my point spectacularly. Our narcissistic political culture will blame Johnson for this - ignoring the fact that he can’t do it without the others. The fact that the other leaders take the same line doest matter. Johnson is to blame for that having implicitly peddled the line that we can do everything on our own.
I simply do not agree with you - there is no appetite for the RAF to confront Russian aircraft over Ukraine, and it is the agreed position of the entire opposition
It’s not the agreed position of the entire Tory Party or press. Not by a long shot.
If Johnson gets the blame for something that is not his fault it is karma. He has got away with lots of things that he shouldn't have got away with him. I think he will have little sympathy from many of us. That said, I would far rather he lost power for being an incompetent hypocritical liar. When? It can't be too soon.
Er...
If Johnson gets the blame for starting WWIII when it's not his fault, I am struggling to see that as karma, given, y'know... WWIII.
I don't see it mattering much to Boris if he gets the blame for starting WW3 - Tory MP's will wait for the outcome of the Sue Gray inquiry before jumping to any rash decisions.
I visualise some backwoods Tory mp in the irradiated ruins of his basement poring over the SG report transcribed by hand onto a bog roll.
Are some people terminally stupid when it comes to point scoring
Alix Culbertson @alixculbertson OneWeb was saved from bankruptcy by the British taxpayer. It is set to launch 36 satellites from a Russian-owned I in Kazakhstan this week, on Russian-owned rockets.
It’s believed to already have been paid for.
Should it still go ahead?
If it's been paid for then it needs to go ahead - what you can't do is use it for future launches.
It's an interesting one. Alix Cuthbertson is a Sky political reporter.
Based in London, but UK Gov stake now down to 20-25%, based in London, plus a golden share and whatever else is built into the agreement. The service can reach N of 50 degrees North. With far larger shares being held by the Indian interest - and India has (if I am up to date) stood back from such thorough sanctions as used elsewhere.
Do we even have the power to stop it?
There are another 5 launches planned for 2022, currently from Russia.
But it would not surprise me if Russia postponed the launch themselves.
Wasn't this one of Dom's projects?
The launches were booked and bought before the bankruptcy. The guy who ran OneWeb into the ground was hard core Elon Musk hater and the only way to even vaguely close the numbers was the cheap launch via Russia.
The first thing that happened, as part of the emergence from bankruptcy was moving to a newer design of satellite (aka Gen 2). This will be launched, almost certainly, from India. It can't be launched from Russia due to export controls issues.
This was another nail in the coffin of Russian space technology.
I'm a bit concerned about the International Space Station.
I am, a bit. But, if nothing else, the Russians have people on the station. To actually fuck things up would require them to be suicidal.
If they have any sense, they’ll ask the Americans for a ride home with SpaceX, and claim asylum when they get there.
They physically can't do that - the SpaceX space suits are custom to the astronaut and the Dragon systems aren't compatible with the Russian suits. So even if SpaceX sent up an empty Dragon.....
AIUI the 'space suits' currently used by SpaceX are basically just emergency pressure suits - and nowhere near EVA suits (although it looks like they're working on them). Is there a technical reason why the suits would be required for human 'cargo' ? They wouldn't have comms or emergency supplies such as air, but AFAIAA a person could return in shirt sleeves.
Returning in shirt sleeves is what killed the Soyuz 11 crew - cabin pressure leak and they couldn't do anything.
The SpaceX suits are, apparently half way to EVA suits. Because they are much more form fitted and have a lot of resistance to ballooning built in, when inflated they don't completely immobilise the wearer, unlike many of the capsule suit design. Most of the work to create an EVA suit based on them is adding multiple redundancies to systems, and "hardening" the outside of the suit. Not sure if they are adding another layer - I don't think so.
Yep, but in an emergency...
Edit: with the Shuttle, there was a small chance that the cargo bay doors wouldn't shut properly. In that case, someone might have to go out into the cargo bay to close them. After which, if it was a Spacelab mission, they could not get back into the cabin. So they would have to go back to Earth in the hold...
Ahead of tomorrow’s Birmingham Erdington by-election to replace the late Jack Dromey, GB News has unearthed footage of Labour candidate Paulette Hamilton appearing to question the value of democracy and considering “an uprising” to “get what we want“.
According to GB News, a Labour Party spokesperson this morning said:
“Paulette Hamilton is arguing for better representation for the black community in public life and as she is campaigning to become Birmingham’s first black MP she has a point.”
You could have mentioned that the clip was from 2015, but chose not to, I guess. We always see this mud-raking from the distant past now, on all sides.
You think that matters? She had been a councillor for 11 years by then:
Are these the most comprehensive worldwide sanctions ever? If so, they'll be a serious benchmark for the future. If they work then we have a blueprint. If they don't...well that isn't good for our go-to non-military response.
Pretty much, yes. The only thing close was what has been applied to Iran in recent years.
There are some advantages to the massive globalisation, and dominance of US-domiciled companies over the past couple of decades. One of which is the way we can make a rogue country pretty much disappear from the global order overnight.
It’s a scary power to have though, and needs to be used sparingly. One likely outcome of all this, not much spoken about so far, is that Russia ends up as a Chinese vassal state. China’s happily waiting for their economy to collapse a bit more, and the Western heat to die down, before they make their move.
Does anyone know how much damage we are collectively doing to the Russian economy and how long Putin will put up with it before he acts / is ousted?
Wondering if the economic position is more of a threat to him than the growing military failure / escalation.
Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising had a conventional WWIII triggered when economic catastrophe inside the Soviet Union forced them to attack to try and secure more resources - 'do it now whilst we still can'. I wonder if our successful trashing of Russian economic capabilities might not drive a similar lunatic decision.
Not that I think we should stop doing so. I'm just curious.
The US economic sanctions of Cuba, have been in place for over 50 years, and do not seem to have dislodged it leader, IMHO at this stage they are helping the leadership who can use them as an excuse for economic hardship at home and blame it on the nasty outsides and tell there people that why they should all rally around the leadership.
hopefully the economic sanctions in place on Russia now, will make the people realise that something impotent is happening, question state propergada share story's and maybe video from Ukraine, then protest and overthought Putin.
If that does not happen, in the relatedly short time. then these sanctions may be counterproductive. Is a population without iPhones more or less likely to see videos of the destruction of Kyiv?
Agreed. Sanctions need to target the decision makers, not oligarchs or the man on the St Petersburg omnibus. Putin will always be able to get hold of caviar for his breakfast even if the supermarkets are out of cornflakes. Some sanctions even seem close to giving Russia free money by handing over joint assets.
Disagreed, we've "targetted" sanctions for years and it does nothing and they're easily circumvented.
We need to destroy the Russian economy. Unfortunate for their population, but that's the path their dictator has chosen for them.
Either the people rise up and replace their dictator, or they don't but the dictator is left ruling an economic wasteland and he has no power or taxes as a result.
I agree that this economic war was the right thing to do - I banged the table asking that the Big Dog regrow his balls and take this path. And here's why - its having a devastating effect.
The question remains - what next? We hope for a palace coup but no signs of that so far or for the last few decades. If you are Putin and economic war has already ruined your country does that make the leap to unrestricted submarine warfare (and planes and troops etc etc) a little more rational than it would have been otherwise?
Steve Hanke @steve_hanke #EconWatch: The war in #Ukraine has shut down Black Sea ports. #Wheat prices have accordingly surged to “limit up”. As long as the war in Ukraine continues, wheat prices will be up, up, and away.
Apologies for half-written comment, Mr E-in-Tokyo.
There are many neutrals across the world who knew little about Putin. I'm sure there are plenty of Russians who look back nostalgically on Stalin, but most of the rest of the world don't. "I hate you, Blakey." (for those old enough to remember) isn't a good advert for tolerance.
Ahead of tomorrow’s Birmingham Erdington by-election to replace the late Jack Dromey, GB News has unearthed footage of Labour candidate Paulette Hamilton appearing to question the value of democracy and considering “an uprising” to “get what we want“.
According to GB News, a Labour Party spokesperson this morning said:
“Paulette Hamilton is arguing for better representation for the black community in public life and as she is campaigning to become Birmingham’s first black MP she has a point.”
You could have mentioned that the clip was from 2015, but chose not to, I guess. We always see this mud-raking from the distant past now, on all sides.
You think that matters? She had been a councillor for 11 years by then:
She’s holding up, thanks for asking. Her father is safe, but extended family and friends are all over the place in both countries, with the full spectrum of views on the conflict.
No problem. Don't have a lot else to do sitting here waiting for my legs to be put back together when it dawn on me she was Ukrainian (operation now tomorrow)
Good to know that as far as you know people are well.
My neighbour is Russian and I suspect I am not going to broach the subject. She is very nice but has a very dry sense of humour so it can be very difficult to judge sometime if she is annoyed or messing with me. So far it has always been the latter. I don't want to misjudge that on such a sensitive topic.
Thanks for the well wishes, and same to you. Good luck with your operation tomorrow.
Mr. Cookie, only heard a little of ESG stuff but it sounds totally fucking insane, prioritising socially approved views ahead of what makes commercial sense.
Senior US defense official tells reporters that Russia's 40-mile convoy, advancing on Kyiv, remains where it did yesterday because of: -Ukrainian resistance -Fuel sustainment problems -Running out of food -And the Russians may be regrouping, rethinking, and reevaluating"
I think that’s pretty much all the possible reasons offered by the PB General Staff, so hoora, everyone’s right. Has it even been confirmed that the column is 40 miles long?
Depends how you define length of a single column as opposed to a few different columns of shorter length. When the Selebian family moved north, my wife drove our fiesta up loaded with stuff and picked up the keys to the house while I finished loading the hired van and then followed. We had an approx 100-mile convoy* of Selebian supply vehicles for our assault on the North.
Sberbank, largest bank in Russia, has essentially collapsed. It’s exiting Europe because it has insufficient liquidity to meet its obligations. It’s equity trades on the LSE via ADRs but is now trading at one cent.
Meanwhile banks that trade the RUB are facing chaos. Margin calls out to clients that can’t / won’t be paid, no realistic ability to hedge any long RUB positions of any size and insufficient liquidity for trades to even settle. As for anyone daft enough to have agreed to finance Russian securities through reverse repos…
On the commodities side, there was a pre-invasion assumption that Urals crude would be diverted to China. About 5mm bbls a day. But something is going wrong. Whether that’s a shipping issue or a trade finance issue I’m not sure. But Urals crude is suddenly toxic waste. Reportedly Trafigura marketed a cargo at an $18 discount to Brent and didn’t receive a single bid.
When *Trafigura* can't make a profit of your shit.....
When it comes to Urals crude I think the issue will be fears that delivery may not be possible so why take the risk.
That plus reputational risk, payments & sanctions.
Would you want to be the one explaining to the board about why the company is being fucked by the entire US Justice Dept. because you bought some Russian crude?
What I am interested in is the way that the big companies have complied with sanctions, written off huge loses and there is not even a murmur in the market about it.
The reputational issue is massive but finding boats willing to accept Russian crude is going to be part of it. Europe politically may be wavering about stopping taking molecules of Russia hydrocarbons because of their dependence. But at a corporate level firms are gold-plating the sanctions, as too much hassle and too much risk. And beyond Europe, other countries can afford to be more choosy about what they are willing to buy. Goodness knows what another week of this does on the streets of Moscow and corridors in the Kremlin.
Several bank have stated they won't touch anything by/with/from/to/for/at/near Russia.
Presumably Russia is still supplying Gas (and oil) thought pipelines going though Poland to Germany and other states.
Will they get trend off and if so by who? Russia or Germany?
As far as I know Russia has not threaded to tern the taps off yet but I am suppressed it has not?
Jeez. Even the tax authorities have a dark sense of humour and eye for great publicity.
No one has answered my question about the tax implications of a Polish Mig29 pilot taking his aircraft on holiday with him to Ukraine. Normally the tax authorities frown on using company vehicles for personal travel......
Ahead of tomorrow’s Birmingham Erdington by-election to replace the late Jack Dromey, GB News has unearthed footage of Labour candidate Paulette Hamilton appearing to question the value of democracy and considering “an uprising” to “get what we want“.
According to GB News, a Labour Party spokesperson this morning said:
“Paulette Hamilton is arguing for better representation for the black community in public life and as she is campaigning to become Birmingham’s first black MP she has a point.”
You could have mentioned that the clip was from 2015, but chose not to, I guess. We always see this mud-raking from the distant past now, on all sides.
You think that matters? She had been a councillor for 11 years by then:
Sberbank, largest bank in Russia, has essentially collapsed. It’s exiting Europe because it has insufficient liquidity to meet its obligations. It’s equity trades on the LSE via ADRs but is now trading at one cent.
Meanwhile banks that trade the RUB are facing chaos. Margin calls out to clients that can’t / won’t be paid, no realistic ability to hedge any long RUB positions of any size and insufficient liquidity for trades to even settle. As for anyone daft enough to have agreed to finance Russian securities through reverse repos…
On the commodities side, there was a pre-invasion assumption that Urals crude would be diverted to China. About 5mm bbls a day. But something is going wrong. Whether that’s a shipping issue or a trade finance issue I’m not sure. But Urals crude is suddenly toxic waste. Reportedly Trafigura marketed a cargo at an $18 discount to Brent and didn’t receive a single bid.
When *Trafigura* can't make a profit of your shit.....
When it comes to Urals crude I think the issue will be fears that delivery may not be possible so why take the risk.
That plus reputational risk, payments & sanctions.
Would you want to be the one explaining to the board about why the company is being fucked by the entire US Justice Dept. because you bought some Russian crude?
What I am interested in is the way that the big companies have complied with sanctions, written off huge loses and there is not even a murmur in the market about it.
The reputational issue is massive but finding boats willing to accept Russian crude is going to be part of it. Europe politically may be wavering about stopping taking molecules of Russia hydrocarbons because of their dependence. But at a corporate level firms are gold-plating the sanctions, as too much hassle and too much risk. And beyond Europe, other countries can afford to be more choosy about what they are willing to buy. Goodness knows what another week of this does on the streets of Moscow and corridors in the Kremlin.
Several bank have stated they won't touch anything by/with/from/to/for/at/near Russia.
Presumably Russia is still supplying Gas (and oil) thought pipelines going though Poland to Germany and other states.
Will they get trend off and if so by who? Russia or Germany?
As far as I know Russia has not threaded to tern the taps off yet but I am suppressed it has not?
If the Germans stopped purchasing gas - not sure that they could - Russia would be treble fucked. Instead of double fucked.
Jeez. Even the tax authorities have a dark sense of humour and eye for great publicity.
No one has answered my question about the tax implications of a Polish Mig29 pilot taking his aircraft on holiday with him to Ukraine. Normally the tax authorities frown on using company vehicles for personal travel......
He should be able to claim a VAT refund on his cargo, if it was permanently exported from the EU.
Apologies for half-written comment, Mr E-in-Tokyo.
There are many neutrals across the world who knew little about Putin. I'm sure there are plenty of Russians who look back nostalgically on Stalin, but most of the rest of the world don't. "I hate you, Blakey." (for those old enough to remember) isn't a good advert for tolerance.
His PR dept needs some help.
The memory of 'safety and world respect' under Stalin, and the (relatively) comfortable times for many is what keeps to Communist vote going, I believe. A bit like Brexiteers harking back to a non-existent Golden Age in the 50's & 60's.
Jeez. Even the tax authorities have a dark sense of humour and eye for great publicity.
No one has answered my question about the tax implications of a Polish Mig29 pilot taking his aircraft on holiday with him to Ukraine. Normally the tax authorities frown on using company vehicles for personal travel......
He should be able to claim a VAT refund on his cargo, if it was permanently exported from the EU.
What if he refuels in mid-air from a American tanker, over the Baltic Sea, but in the territorial waters of Sweden?
This is a bit of a concerning backpedalling from the rhetoric yesterday, from Lavrov. Yesterday he ruled it out, suggesting a weakening of Putin's authority, now he's saying it could be both nuclear and destructive. The threats are back on, but still slightly back from Putin's original rhetoric.
Sberbank, largest bank in Russia, has essentially collapsed. It’s exiting Europe because it has insufficient liquidity to meet its obligations. It’s equity trades on the LSE via ADRs but is now trading at one cent.
Meanwhile banks that trade the RUB are facing chaos. Margin calls out to clients that can’t / won’t be paid, no realistic ability to hedge any long RUB positions of any size and insufficient liquidity for trades to even settle. As for anyone daft enough to have agreed to finance Russian securities through reverse repos…
On the commodities side, there was a pre-invasion assumption that Urals crude would be diverted to China. About 5mm bbls a day. But something is going wrong. Whether that’s a shipping issue or a trade finance issue I’m not sure. But Urals crude is suddenly toxic waste. Reportedly Trafigura marketed a cargo at an $18 discount to Brent and didn’t receive a single bid.
When *Trafigura* can't make a profit of your shit.....
When it comes to Urals crude I think the issue will be fears that delivery may not be possible so why take the risk.
That plus reputational risk, payments & sanctions.
Would you want to be the one explaining to the board about why the company is being fucked by the entire US Justice Dept. because you bought some Russian crude?
What I am interested in is the way that the big companies have complied with sanctions, written off huge loses and there is not even a murmur in the market about it.
The reputational issue is massive but finding boats willing to accept Russian crude is going to be part of it. Europe politically may be wavering about stopping taking molecules of Russia hydrocarbons because of their dependence. But at a corporate level firms are gold-plating the sanctions, as too much hassle and too much risk. And beyond Europe, other countries can afford to be more choosy about what they are willing to buy. Goodness knows what another week of this does on the streets of Moscow and corridors in the Kremlin.
Several bank have stated they won't touch anything by/with/from/to/for/at/near Russia.
Presumably Russia is still supplying Gas (and oil) thought pipelines going though Poland to Germany and other states.
Will they get trend off and if so by who? Russia or Germany?
As far as I know Russia has not threaded to tern the taps off yet but I am suppressed it has not?
If the Germans stopped purchasing gas - not sure that they could - Russia would be treble fucked. Instead of double fucked.
Long term Russia would yes have problems, but short term, maybe 2-3 weeks, would energy costs not spike (even more than they have already) in Europe?
Illia Ponomarenko @IAPonomarenko · 1h Yanykovych? Back as Ukraine’s “president” as a result of Russia’s war? Them in the Kremlin are just plain fucking stupid.
I don't really see what Yanukovich is meant to be in charge of if Donetsk and Lughansk are 'independent' republics. He can never win an election on that basis; not even a heavily rigged one.
Does anyone know how much damage we are collectively doing to the Russian economy and how long Putin will put up with it before he acts / is ousted?
Wondering if the economic position is more of a threat to him than the growing military failure / escalation.
Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising had a conventional WWIII triggered when economic catastrophe inside the Soviet Union forced them to attack to try and secure more resources - 'do it now whilst we still can'. I wonder if our successful trashing of Russian economic capabilities might not drive a similar lunatic decision.
Not that I think we should stop doing so. I'm just curious.
No, we don't know. The effects of sanctions will be a surprise to everyone, I suspect. The existing ones will thoroughly trash the Russian economy. The big question is what happens when the Central Bank runs out of reserves.
Yes, it is economic warfare vs Russian warfare in Ukraine.
I suspect that when the sanctions start to hit things that Putin cares about - military capabilities, for example - he will lash out.
I suspect the real trigger point would be to target his personal wealth.
I hate the “it’s all about us” tone of much internet commentary about the crisis but, dipping my toe in, the demands for a NFZ are not going to help Johnson. He can’t do it because the U.K. doesn’t alone have the resources and, well, WW3 but increasingly there are calls from the armchair generals for one. Ultimately, when Kyiv falls and this war turns into Syria redux, a lot of the blame for that will come from said Monday morning quarterbacks and fall on Johnson’s shoulders. He can’t really win.
Please enlighten me on which NATO country disagrees with Boris over no fly zones
When have you heard UVDL, Macron, Biden endorse enforcing no fly zones
You miss my point spectacularly. Our narcissistic political culture will blame Johnson for this - ignoring the fact that he can’t do it without the others. The fact that the other leaders take the same line doest matter. Johnson is to blame for that having implicitly peddled the line that we can do everything on our own.
I simply do not agree with you - there is no appetite for the RAF to confront Russian aircraft over Ukraine, and it is the agreed position of the entire opposition
It’s not the agreed position of the entire Tory Party or press. Not by a long shot.
If Johnson gets the blame for something that is not his fault it is karma. He has got away with lots of things that he shouldn't have got away with him. I think he will have little sympathy from many of us. That said, I would far rather he lost power for being an incompetent hypocritical liar. When? It can't be too soon.
Er...
If Johnson gets the blame for starting WWIII when it's not his fault, I am struggling to see that as karma, given, y'know... WWIII.
I don't see it mattering much to Boris if he gets the blame for starting WW3 - Tory MP's will wait for the outcome of the Sue Gray inquiry before jumping to any rash decisions.
I visualise some backwoods Tory mp in the irradiated ruins of his basement poring over the SG report transcribed by hand onto a bog roll.
‘Rejoice, Big Dog has gotten away with it!’
I don't think any Tory MP would say 'gotten' - they certainly won't be getting my vote if they do.
Can anyone see a plausible route to a relatively peaceful solution? I'm struggling.
Putin's usual way to wind these things up is with a frozen conflict. Occupy and repress a large part of eastern Ukraine with a land bridge to Crimea and ideally Transnistria. Wait for regime change in whatever's left of Ukraine and try to tip it into failed state status. The western powers will lose interest in it soon enough (remember when everyone had plenty of fucks to give about Afghanistan). Try again and grab another slice in 10-15 years.
Difference is Ukraine wants to be part of the west; Afghanistan didn't. No doubt Putin will try, but it's equally possible the evil fuck could be gone himself.
Comments
It would be nice to think damaging the economy would get rid of the leader and the problem would go away but I can't think of a single case where anything like that has happened, out of the many times it's been tried. (South Africa, possibly, dunno?)
hopefully the economic sanctions in place on Russia now, will make the people realise that something impotent is happening, question state propergada share story's and maybe video from Ukraine, then protest and overthought Putin.
If that does not happen, in the relatedly short time. then these sanctions may be counterproductive. Is a population without iPhones more or less likely to see videos of the destruction of Kyiv?
Would you want to be the one explaining to the board about why the company is being fucked by the entire US Justice Dept. because you bought some Russian crude?
What I am interested in is the way that the big companies have complied with sanctions, written off huge loses and there is not even a murmur in the market about it.
Russia got caught doping so they had the 'not Russian, honest' flag. Now their country has invaded Ukraine and they've got an Olympic 'super duper not Russian, honest' flag.
and if we can host at least some events here for any other nations that chose to also boycott.
Was that why he sent a lot to what was until then S. Poland? To put them right on the fringes.
The majority of the white population was increasingly unhappy with the system. They kept going with it because of the threat of Communism/African Dictatorships. "Better us than the Commies and lunatic warlords".....
Once the threat of communism collapse, the ANC turned itself into a Social Democratic party etc and there was a general outbreak of democracy in Africa, the last threadbare pair of pants the system had were gone...
EDIT: The current sanctions against Russia are far wider and deeper than any tried on South Africa.
Good to know that as far as you know people are well.
My neighbour is Russian and I suspect I am not going to broach the subject. She is very nice but has a very dry sense of humour so it can be very difficult to judge sometime if she is annoyed or messing with me. So far it has always been the latter. I don't want to misjudge that on such a sensitive topic.
https://samf.substack.com/p/russias-plan-c?utm_source=twitter&s=r
Top stuff on Putin's Plan C and D from Lawrence Freedman
https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/councillors/49/paulette_hamilton
Obviously she'll win, but she's unlikely to be much use to Starmer (unlike Kim Leadbeater, for example).
Bolsonaro in Brazil?
He certainly did this to the ethic Germans in the USSR. Hence the stories of soldiers coming back, complete with a Hero Of The Soviet Union medal, to be put with their families straight on a train to somewhere.....
If so, they'll be a serious benchmark for the future.
If they work then we have a blueprint.
If they don't...well that isn't good for our go-to non-military response.
We need to destroy the Russian economy. Unfortunate for their population, but that's the path their dictator has chosen for them.
Either the people rise up and replace their dictator, or they don't but the dictator is left ruling an economic wasteland and he has no power or taxes as a result.
Has it even been confirmed that the column is 40 miles long?
@steve_hanke
#EconWatch: The war in #Ukraine has shut down Black Sea ports. #Wheat prices have accordingly surged to “limit up”. As long as the war in Ukraine continues, wheat prices will be up, up, and away.
https://twitter.com/steve_hanke/status/1498897223005921283
My comment on Ratnering the brand applies to most of the world. It comes across as 2
Kherson has fallen, per torygraph
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/ethical-investors-have-weakened-the-west-s-defences
"Rewind just a few weeks and much of the City was obsessing over ESG issues. Fund managers were harassing the oil companies to stop developing domestic supplies of gas, even though our failure to do so has increased our dependence on Russia. And critically, they were demonising defence companies on the basis that making weapons was immoral or wrong. Many companies had slowly started winding down their defence units. It was not worth the hassle of trying to justify them to woke fund managers, nor was it worth the damage done to the share price."
No tax is due on your recently acquired tank or rocket launcher
https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/804441.html
*two vehicles
‘Rejoice, Big Dog has gotten away with it!’
Edit: with the Shuttle, there was a small chance that the cargo bay doors wouldn't shut properly. In that case, someone might have to go out into the cargo bay to close them. After which, if it was a Spacelab mission, they could not get back into the cabin. So they would have to go back to Earth in the hold...
https://waynehale.wordpress.com/2019/09/25/oops/
The tweet quoted says "unearthed footage"
Who has ever said that about a current event?
There are some advantages to the massive globalisation, and dominance of US-domiciled companies over the past couple of decades. One of which is the way we can make a rogue country pretty much disappear from the global order overnight.
It’s a scary power to have though, and needs to be used sparingly. One likely outcome of all this, not much spoken about so far, is that Russia ends up as a Chinese vassal state. China’s happily waiting for their economy to collapse a bit more, and the Western heat to die down, before they make their move.
The question remains - what next? We hope for a palace coup but no signs of that so far or for the last few decades. If you are Putin and economic war has already ruined your country does that make the leap to unrestricted submarine warfare (and planes and troops etc etc) a little more rational than it would have been otherwise?
There are many neutrals across the world who knew little about Putin. I'm sure there are plenty of Russians who look back nostalgically on Stalin, but most of the rest of the world don't. "I hate you, Blakey." (for those old enough to remember) isn't a good advert for tolerance.
His PR dept needs some help.
Even the tax authorities have a dark sense of humour and eye for great publicity.
Will they get trend off and if so by who? Russia or Germany?
As far as I know Russia has not threaded to tern the taps off yet but I am suppressed it has not?
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1498989441154703365
(Bucha is just to the NW of Kyiv, very close)
A bit like Brexiteers harking back to a non-existent Golden Age in the 50's & 60's.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10568685/Russias-foreign-minister-warns-world-war-NUCLEAR-destructive.html
This is a bit concerning, because these movements on such high-stakes rhetoric suggest to me there could be a power struggle going on.
No doubt Putin will try, but it's equally possible the evil fuck could be gone himself.