Chronology of the imposition of sanctions against Russian citizens and companies. Bloomberg told when the US will introduce "hellish sanctions" against Russia

After the entry of Crimea into the Russian Federation, the US government is very indignant and tries to ruin the life of Russia as much as possible. In the course, as usual, is the favorite weapon of the Americans - sanctions. There have already been quite a few cases in history when the actions of Russia were extremely objectionable to the American government, and they applied all the same sanctions. We invite you to find out the historical facts about what sanctions the US government applied to the USSR and Russia.

First step

Today, the United States has begun to carry out its threats against Russia for the "Crimean policy" of the country. According to information from the official website of the magazine Foreign Economic Relations of Russia, Washington boycotted the presence of Russian experts at the talks on veterinary and phytosanitary measures in the context of Kazakhstan's accession to the WTO. The deputy head of the Rosselkhoznadzor, Nikolai Vlasov, literally an hour before departure, received a call from the American embassy and was told that the visit of Russian experts was unacceptable for the United States.

Embargo 1931-1933

Today, only the lazy does not blame the USSR for the famine resulting from collectivization, especially the Holodomor in Ukraine of 1932-1933. But few people know that it was the policy of the West that led to this terrible tragedy.
The USSR in the 30s fell into a real economic boycott. The West tried to stifle the new political entity without military intervention. Let's turn to the dates: 1929 - the Great Depression in the United States and the first five-year plan in the USSR. Washington introduces its first ban - the refusal to accept Union gold. And in 1930, an embargo was introduced on the import of all Soviet goods, except for grain! In the same year, France joins the states, and three years later Britain. Thus, the Stalinist leadership was faced with a choice - either to stop industrialization, since access to foreign goods, in particular machine tools, becomes limited, or to take grain from the peasants and use it as currency. But why did the West need Soviet grain at that moment? In America, their food was destroyed in huge quantities, and the grain of the USSR was regularly accepted. It was cheaper for Europe to buy the US surplus, but it also bought more expensive Soviet agricultural products. Everything initially led to the emergence of dissatisfaction with the Soviet authorities. The drought of 1931 worsened the situation, ruining the harvest, and there was nothing to buy food in the West due to the gold blockade and the lack of currency as a result of the embargo. The result is known: the Holodomor became a black spot in the history of the USSR.

Jackson-Vanik

Today, the emigration freedom of Russian citizens is practically unlimited. It wasn't always like that. In 1972, a decree was issued in the USSR, according to which emigrants with higher education were obliged to pay the costs of the state for their education in universities. The amount of such compensation was considerable. This significantly reduced the chances of potential emigrants to go abroad. The world community, primarily Israel and the United States, was outraged by such "infringement of rights", since the decree significantly limited the "brain flow" to these countries. In 1974, the Jackson-Vanik amendment was passed in the United States. This document prohibited the granting of the most favored nation in trade, government loans and loan guarantees to countries that violate or seriously restrict the rights of their citizens to emigrate, as well as other human rights. It is not difficult to understand that this was precisely an "anti-Soviet measure." The amendment also provided for the application of discriminatory tariffs and fees to goods imported into the United States from countries with non-market economies. For a long time, the Jackson-Vanik Amendment significantly overshadowed the economic relations between Russia and the United States. The amendment was repealed only in 2012.

Magnitsky law

One of the most sensational sanctions in recent times was the Magnitsky Act of 2012, which at first glance seems to be one of the manifestations of the American struggle for justice. The essence was to limit the visa corridor to the United States, as well as freezing the American accounts of persons involved in the case of Sergei Leonidovich Magnitsky. Passing as a witness and suspect in a major economic crime of the Hermitage Capital Management fund, he died in the Matrosskaya Tishina detention center under unknown circumstances.

It would seem that this is a harmless sanction for "pure conscience" people. But, in fact, this Magnitsky law has become one of the main levers of pressure on Russia by the United States. Washington has repeatedly raised the issue of expanding the list to include people accused of corruption or human rights violations. That is, in fact, today America can threaten with false accusations and freezing of assets to all influential people in Russia.

Boycott the 1980 Olympics

In February 1980, the UN General Assembly overwhelmingly condemned the entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan. The parliaments of the leading Western countries supported the boycott initiative. The very holding of the Summer Olympics in the USSR turned out to be a big question. The relevant issue was raised on the agenda of the International Olympic Committee. However, the IOC members once again voted to hold the Games-80 in Moscow. On the sidelines, IOC President Lord Killanin told the head of the USSR sports department, Sergei Pavlov: "If the IOC consisted of ministers, you would lose the games." For the consistent upholding of the principles of Olympism and non-interference of sports in politics, as well as support for the Soviet application, IOC President Killanin received the nickname “Red Lord” in the Western press. On April 12, 1980, a final decision was made at the US NOC headquarters in Colorado Springs American team in the 1980 Olympics. The leaders of the Olympians obeyed the demands of the politicians. Already during the celebration of the closing of the games in Moscow, which took place on August 3, the Soviet side violated the established ceremonial twice: the flag was not handed over to the organizers of the next Olympics and the anthem of the United States, the country hosting the next Olympics, was not performed. Thus began the boycott of the Los Angeles Summer Olympics.

Sanctions after the downed Boeing

US President Ronald Reagan, upon learning of the sinking of the South Korean liner, called the incident "a crime against humanity that must never be forgotten." Moreover, Washington had its own account for the actions of the Soviet air defense, since US Congressman Larry MacDonald, a temperamental anti-communist and very promising politician, died in the crash. The very next day after the tragedy, on September 2, 1983, the US Federal Aviation Administration closed the R-20 airline for civil aviation, which, in fact, meant a blockade of air communications with the USSR. Aeroflot flights were canceled for two months and the airspace between the USA and the USSR was blocked, however, under pressure from American airlines, which lost one of the shortest routes between Alaska and East Asia, the message was opened on October 2.

Black list of institutions

In addition to economic sanctions, the United States also practices sanctions against Russia that limit scientific cooperation. Thus, in 1998, Washington's "black list" (on suspicion of cooperation with Iran in the missile and nuclear fields) included 10 Russian institutions: the Baltic State Technical University (former Voenmekh, St. organization "Glavkosmos", research institute "Graphite", research and production association "Polyus", research and production center "INOR", firm "Moso", Moscow Aviation Institute, Russian University of Chemical Technology. DI. Mendeleev, as well as divisions of the Research and Design Institute of Power Engineering (NIKIET). In accordance with the sanctions of the US leadership, American companies were prohibited from receiving directly or indirectly from these Russian organizations any goods, technologies or services. It is interesting to note that, according to press reports, none of the enterprises suffered damage from the imposition of sanctions, since they did not have contracts with American companies. By 2004, sanctions had been lifted from five organizations, and in February 2010 restrictions on cooperation with Voenmekh were lifted. Nevertheless, the threat of preventing Russian technologies from entering the world market still exists today, and sales markets for high-tech products from Russia may be partially blocked.

120737 | 16

Economic sanctions against Russia have different roots, structures, mechanisms and goals. A distinctive feature of these sanctions is their targeted focus, i.e., restrictions are not imposed on the state as a whole, as a single geo-economic entity, but on individual residents of the country: commercial structures and individuals. Also, it should be noted separately that sanctions come not only from individual sovereign states, but also from extraterritorial organizations.

Reasons for economic sanctions against Russia [RF].

The reasons for the sanctions against Russia [RF] are complex in their basis and chronology. But they can be divided into political and financial-economic.

Political reasons for sanctions against Russia [RF] .

The leitmotif of the need to apply sanctions against Russia was its participation in the events that unfolded on the territory of the neighboring state - Ukraine. By the end of 2013, a civil revolution began in Ukraine, which led to a coup d'état. One [western and central] part of the population of Ukraine supported the coup d'état, the other [south-eastern] part of the population of the country opposed. Since the conflict of political and other interests was accompanied by acts of violence in different parts of the country, separatist sentiments in the south-east of the country sharply increased in Ukraine. The Autonomous Republic of Crimea [and the city of Sevastopol] was the first to announce its secession from unitary Ukraine, holding a referendum on the formation of the Republic of Crimea on March 16, 2014, with the subsequent intention of joining Russia as a subject of the Federation. Russia supported the holding of the referendum with a military presence on the peninsula. In the referendum, 82.71% of voters voted, with a result of 96.77% in favor of joining the Russian Federation. On March 17, the leadership of the Republic of Crimea turned to Russia with a request to join as a subject. Ultimately, the Russian Federation recognized the referendum in Crimea and granted the request to annex the peninsula to Russia, since Crimea is of great strategic importance for the Russian Federation in the Black Sea region.

The international community, represented by states with a developed market economy, primarily the United States, did not recognize the referendum in Crimea and considered the annexation of Crimea to Russia, despite the very will of the population of Crimea, an act of military aggression against the territorial integrity of Ukraine.

Separate tendencies also covered the east of Ukraine - the Donbass region. On the basis of the Lugansk and Donetsk regions of Ukraine on May 11, 2014, the Luhansk People's Republic and the Donetsk People's Republic were proclaimed through a referendum. A war began in Ukraine, on the one hand, for the preservation of the territorial integrity of the unitary Ukrainian state, and on the other hand, for the formation of a new [confederal] state formation "Novorossiya" on the basis of the southeastern regions of Ukraine. Despite the fact that the Russian Federation has not officially recognized the LPR and DPR until today, has not sent its peacekeeping troops to the territory of Ukraine, nevertheless, Western countries, including Australia and Japan, they are trying to assign exclusively to Russia. Although the Western countries themselves provide financial, humanitarian, technical and other assistance to the authorities of Ukraine in the current civil war, which automatically makes them complicit, i.e. equally responsible. The mutual participation of the parties in the Ukrainian conflict indicates the nature of the geopolitical confrontation. Therefore, the first reason is geopolitics.

Economic reasons for sanctions against Russia [RF] .

The collapse of the USSR for the developed capitalist countries and their companies had nominally three “positive” consequences:

1. Manufacturers of developed capitalist countries got rid of the main competitor in the world market, therefore, they got the opportunity to increase trade turnover and their share in the structure of the world market.

2. Got a new market in the face of the countries of the former socialist bloc [Eastern Europe and the CIS].

3. We were able to acquire tangible assets in the post-Soviet space.

The semi-criminal privatization of Soviet industries in the 1990s led to the actual stagnation and disappearance from world markets of many types of Russian [Soviet] production. With the collapse of the USSR, the economy of the Russian Federation did not have many industries that could compete on the world market.

Competitive sectors of the economy of the Russian Federation [RF]:

1. Oil and gas industry.

2. Defense-industrial complex [OPK, VPK].

3. Nuclear power.

4. Aviation and space industry.

5. Banking.

6. Others.

De facto, the oil and gas industry has become the main industry and the driving force behind the growth of the Russian economy, whose products in the structure of Russian exports range from 50% to 80% annually. The main market for Russian exports is the European Union, whose share in the turnover is up to 50%. The growth in demand and prices for oil and gas in the world market provided the Russian economy with liquidity and an inflow of foreign currency. There is a trend of mutual dependence of the economies of the Russian Federation and the EU, the European Union depends on the supply of Russian energy resources, Russia depends on foreign exchange earnings from the European Union.

The deepening of economic cooperation between the European Union and Russia has allowed the Russian Federation to accumulate sufficient financial resources to start the process of leveling [diversifying] the economy and reviving other potentially competitive industries.

Since 2007, the process of forming state corporations and consolidating the share capital of enterprises in various strategically important sectors of the Russian economy under their supervision began in Russia. This is how Russian state corporations [Rostec, Rosnano, Rosatom, Vnesheconombank, etc.] and large industry [state and semi-state] companies [Gazprom, Rosneft, Sberbank of Russia, etc.] took shape. etc.], which began to increase their presence in the world and, above all, the European market.

Accordingly, by 2007, industry-specific [state and semi-state] companies took shape in Russia, which began to compete globally with leading transnational companies and corporations from countries of developed capitalist economies, primarily the United States.

From the above, two assumptions can be made:

1. The Ukrainian conflict is a convenient formal pretext for limiting [eliminating] competition from Russian companies in the world and, above all, the European market. Since the transnational companies of the countries of developed economies are not interested in the [prospective] reduction of their share and the growth of competition in the world market.

2. Mechanisms for eliminating competition from Russian companies were chosen not as market, but political, through the information and political lobby.

Economic sanctions against Russia [RF] by industry.

If we analyze the sectoral structure of sanctions against Russia [RF], we find that the sanctions are directed against key [i.e. e. competitive] sectors of the Russian economy: oil, gas, nuclear and military industries of the Russian Federation, as well as against Russian banking capital.

Since the lion's share of Russia's exports is oriented to the European market, in practice, the sanctions against the Russian Federation mean the displacement of Russian companies from the European market. Let's take a closer look.

Sanctions against Russia [RF] in the oil industry [sphere]. Industry trends and background.

The world market for oil and oil production is mostly controlled by American and British multinational companies: ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and others. Shareholders of many national oil companies from different countries are also American and British companies or capital, at least they own a certain share, and hence the income.

Since 2007, domestic oil production has been growing in the United States. If in 2006 the United States daily produced 8316 thousand barrels of oil per day, then in 2013 the daily oil production already amounted to 12304 thousand barrels. That is, the growth in oil production in the United States from 2006-2013 amounted to 48%.

Along with the increase in domestic oil production in the United States, the need for its imports decreased. If in 2005 the United States needed to import 12,477 thousand barrels of oil daily, then in 2013 this need was reduced to 6,582 thousand barrels per day, i.e., in fact, by half.

The second largest consumer of oil after the United States is the European Union. Europe's daily oil demand is between 13 and 15 million barrels. Continental Europe is 90% dependent on oil imports, and this dependence is only increasing due to falling domestic production. The only oil exporting country in Europe is Norway [not part of the EU], it produces 1.8 million barrels per day, of which 1.19 million is exported. All other European countries are oil importers to a greater or lesser extent. Therefore, the EU is the most promising and attractive market for oil exporters. A third of the supply [more than 5 million barrels per day] of oil to Europe is provided by Russia. In view of the increase in oil production in Russia, Russian oil companies are ready to meet the growing demand in the European market.

But a significant increase in domestic oil production in the US is forcing US and British oil companies, which previously supplied Middle Eastern [and elsewhere produced] oil to the US, to look for alternative markets for “freed up” oil [≈ 6 million barrels / day] and Europe in in this case, it seems to be uncontested. Since the European Union is stable, consumes a lot and is solvent. So it turns out that American and British oil companies are ready to satisfy the European oil market, but they run into the expansion of Russian oil [state] companies.

Conclusion from the premise: Ukraine seems to be a convenient occasion to activate the information and political lobby, which through sanctions, indirectly, will squeeze Russian oil companies out of the European market and allow American and British companies to take their place and market share.

Vectors of imposed sanctions in the oil industry:

· Sanctions against Russian oil companies and their subsidiaries, as well as auxiliary companies in the industry.

· A ban on the export of oil production and refining technologies to Russia.

· Refusal of joint projects in the oil sector and investment in promising projects.

Sanctions against Russia [RF] in the gas industry [sphere]. Industry trends and background.

Russia is the world's largest producer of natural gas. The monopoly in the Russian gas sector is the semi-state company Gazprom, which has managed to monopolize the export of not only Russian gas, but also gas produced by the CIS countries. ≈ 40% of the gas produced in the post-Soviet countries is exported to Europe, which accounts for 80% of the total volume of gas exports. Gazprom annually covers one third of Europe's gas needs. The dependence of individual European countries on Russian gas is highly differentiated: from 0 to 100%.

The situation with gas is somewhat similar to the situation with oil, with some differences. The European Union covers a third of its gas needs with its own production, and a third with Gazprom's supplies. A quarter of consumption is provided by gas from Norway and Algeria. The rest of the gas demand is provided by the supply of liquefied natural gas from the Middle East countries and other regions. While Russia seeks to diversify gas supply channels to Europe, the European Union seeks to diversify the suppliers themselves. And here is the next trend.

Since the early 2000s, American companies, in particular Devon Energy Corporation, Chesapeake Energy, ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell, BHP Billiton and others, have been investing heavily in the development of unconventional gas sources. Since 2006, there has been a rapid increase in gas production in the United States. The so-called “shale revolution” is taking place. The shale boom by 2010 led to an excess supply of gas in the domestic market, and by 2012 to a collapse in gas prices in the United States.

The logic of maintaining the liquidity of the industry, with further rapid growth in gas production within the United States, requires American companies to search for a sales market. Saturation of the gas market in North America cannot affect the downward trend in prices. Therefore, American companies in the near future need large markets, primarily in Europe and Asia. Supplying "cheap" American gas to the European market, where the average market price for gas exceeds $400, seems to be mutually beneficial for both the US and Europe.

The problem of exporting American gas to the European market is currently limited by three main factors:

The first limitation is the lack of a sufficient number of LNG regasification terminals in Europe. At present, there are only 20 of them, their throughput capacity is 198 billion m3/year. 6 terminals under construction. After putting them into operation, the capacity will increase by 30 billion m3/year.

The second limitation is the lack of export LNG terminals in the USA. The first such terminal is being built in Louisiana.

The third limitation is the current long-term contracts with Gazprom for the supply of Russian gas to the EU.

Although the lion's share of Gazprom's income depends on gas exports, nevertheless, the company is not limited to the development of gas fields in Russia alone, but operates all over the world, in particular in Libya, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, India, Vietnam, Venezuela, Iran, Nigeria etc. That is, the de facto Russian state-owned company is a global competitor in the world gas market.

When the US resolves the issue of export terminals with sufficient capacity, and Europe with import terminals, Gazprom will systematically and more actively squeeze out of the European market.

Conclusion from the premise: Sanctions are unlikely to be applied to Gazprom in the coming years, due to the lack of technical feasibility of alternative gas supplies to the EU at present. But since the European market looks extremely promising for American and British companies, the sanctions currently being imposed will be directed at all Gazprom's promising projects, both inside Russia and abroad.

Vectors of imposed sanctions in the gas industry:

· Sanctions against Russian gas companies and their subsidiaries, as well as supporting companies in the industry.

· Refusal of joint projects in the gas sector and investment of promising projects.

Sanctions against Russia [RF] in the financial and banking industry [sphere]. Industry trends and background.

The promotion of large business to foreign markets is most often associated with the promotion of banking capital to these markets. The strengthening of the positions of Russian business in the European market was associated with the expansion of Russian banking capital to the European market in order to support Russian export companies and the participation of Russian capital in major international investment projects. The financial reserves accumulated by the Russian Federation allowed Russian state and semi-state banks in the first years after the global financial crisis to begin acquiring foreign banking assets and expanding their branch network abroad. Moreover, many banks in Europe and the world found themselves in a difficult financial situation and were willingly sold.

The locomotives of the banking sector in Russia have become semi-state banks - JSC "Sberbank of Russia", JSC "VTB" [Vneshtorgbank], JSC "Gazprombank" and others.

Sberbank of Russia: So far, managed to master the markets of 20 countries. In addition to Russia, open direct representative offices in Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Germany (Munich), China and India. Acquired assets in Switzerland - SLB; Austria - Volksbank International AG, with a branch network in Hungary, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Romania, Serbia, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine; Turkey - Denizbank, with a branch network in Turkey, Russia, Austria, Cyprus. It is the largest commercial bank in Russia and Europe.

Vneshtorgbank [VTB]: The second largest bank in Russia in terms of assets, operates in the financial market of many countries, has representative offices in Ukraine, Belarus, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Angola, Great Britain, Singapore, UAE, Germany, France, Serbia.

Vnesheconombank: Since 2007, it has been a state corporation, the purpose of which is to provide and attract financial resources for the implementation of large investment projects, support for exports and servicing external public debt. It has representative offices in many countries, participated in the financing of major infrastructure projects (construction of the Ford Sollers plant, reconstruction of Pulkovo airport, construction of Olympic facilities in Sochi, support for projects and companies of Skolkovo, etc.).

Gazprombank: Industry bank, the third in Russia in terms of assets. Participates in the financing of major international projects in the oil and gas industry both within Russia and abroad [Europe, Asia]. In particular, it participates in the projects for the construction of the Blue Stream and Yamal-Europe gas pipelines, and in the development of the European GTS. It also serves companies in the engineering, chemical, nuclear and other industries. Represented in Russia, Switzerland, Armenia, Belarus, China, India, Mongolia.

Conclusion from the premise: the growth of foreign exchange reserves and capitalization of Russian banks, as well as financial difficulties [caused by the global financial crisis] of the world's leading banking institutions, allowed Russia to expand into external financial markets and gain a foothold in them in order to support Russian companies abroad. Leading Russian [state]banks operationally and financially support the activities of oil and gas, nuclear, aviation, defense, information and other companies in Russia in foreign markets. The imposition of sanctions against Russian banks will expand the tools for ousting Russian companies from foreign markets, and above all - European.

Vectors of imposed sanctions in the banking industry:

· Freezing of Russian financial assets of individuals and legal entities.

· Disconnection of Russian banking structures from international payment systems.

· Reducing the client portfolio abroad.

· Restriction of access to investment projects.

· Restriction of access to external borrowings [credits].

· Restriction of financial freedom of Russian companies abroad.

· Other.

List of Russian companies subject to sanctions against Russia [RF].

Sanctions against Russia [RF]: list of countries and industries.

Countries that did not support sanctions against Russia [RF]: China, Brazil, India, South Africa.

Sanctions against Russia [RF]: list of extraterritorial organizations.

Sanctions against Russia [RF]: list of international companies that officially recognized and/or supported the sanctions.

The effect and consequences of sanctions against Russia [RF].

An analysis of the sanctions shows that they are aimed at limiting the presence of Russian [state] companies in various segments of the world and, above all, the European market, which accounts for half of Russia's foreign trade turnover. Relying not on market competition, but on political and informational mechanisms, Western [primarily American and British] companies, through the international lobby, get the opportunity to increase their share in the desired segments of the European market in the future. The civil war in Ukraine is a convenient formal reason for action.

The rapid growth of oil and gas production within the United States is leading to a global redistribution of the world market in this segment. Currently, the struggle for the European market is unfolding.

If current sanctions are maintained or expanded, one can expect a decrease in the share of Russian companies in the oil [and, in the future, gas] market in Europe and their replacement by American and British companies that previously worked for the US market.

Russia's dependence on the supply of raw materials to the EU market sooner or later should have made itself felt, respectively, the diversification of sales markets becomes a priority task for the Russian economy, requiring an accelerated resolution.

The complete economic isolation of Russia looks doubtful, in view of the deep integration of world capitals. For example, the US and the EU, by imposing sanctions against Rosneft, infringe on the interests of the British company BP, which owns 19.75% of the company's shares. Limiting the supply of Russian gas to the EU market, which is currently impossible, will affect the income of the Bank of New York, which owns a 27% stake in Gazprom. The situation is similar with other industries. Those companies in which the share of foreign capital is smaller and the share of the Russian Federation or its residents is higher suffer from sanctions most of all.

The global economy may suffer from an economic confrontation between the Russian Federation and the EU/USA.

Russia is among the world leaders in the production of oil and gas, and the escalation of the conflict with it could lead to a global increase in oil and gas prices, which could significantly aggravate the already difficult post-crisis economic situation in the developed capitalist economies.

What sanctions against the Russian Federation were introduced in connection with the events in Crimea? What consequences did they have? How likely is it that all restrictions will be lifted soon, and what is the real reason for their application to Russia?

The events in Crimea in the spring of 2014, connected with its secession from Ukraine and joining the Russian Federation, caused a great resonance in the world political arena. Many powers found in Russia's actions a threat to the existing order and took the exact opposite position, aimed at containing and preventing such precedents. Even despite the previous conflict and civil war in Ukraine, as a result of which the Republic of Crimea was to some extent forced to secede in order to maintain its political and economic stability, becoming part of Russia.

Although the question of the historical identity of the Crimean peninsula remains quite controversial, most Western states see Russia's actions as a de facto crime. Sanctions against the Russian Federation were aimed at forcing the state to change its decision regarding the disputed territory. What impact they had on the domestic economy and the political situation around the world, we will consider in the next article.

First, let's define the terms and their meaning. It is known that, in a general sense, sanctions are some restrictive measures in the form of punishment for any misconduct or actions. Their goal is to create unfavorable conditions for the object of application and force it to change the chosen course. Also, the very fact of the imposition of sanctions shows the extreme disagreement of the participants of the world community with any political decisions of its individual members and is aimed at forcing the state to change the chosen political course by peaceful means.

World practice provides for the following restrictive measures against states:

• economic sanctions;

Economic measures of influence imply a weakening of the economic situation regarding foreign trade. For example, a state may establish a ban on the export of its goods to a country on which a restriction has been imposed. The ban also applies in the opposite direction - the import of products of the same production is stopped.

Since for many states international relations are built on trade, suppliers are losing their sales market, and consumers cannot purchase a number of goods, since their import has been stopped. We have to look for new channels, which is associated with certain inconveniences and additional costs.

Political measures of influence have an impact directly on the participants who have weight and authority in the international political arena. These can be prominent statesmen, heads of large companies and international holdings, or simply authoritative people whose words are heeded all over the world.

As a result, as a result of the introduction of sanctions of political and economic impact, it is assumed that the state - the object of the imposed restrictions will be to some extent isolated from the rest of the world. How global the impact on the situation within the country itself will be depends on the future of the economy and the general standard of living of citizens. How quickly and effectively the government can reorient the economy from exports and imports of goods to domestic consumption, how significant or insignificant will be the introduction of sanctions against the general population, economic development and political stability.

Economic sanctions against Russia

Let us consider in more detail the sanctions against the Russian Federation, which have the ultimate goal of weakening the economy by restricting international trade and other commercial relations.

Economic sanctions against Russia:

• An embargo is a ban on the import of goods into the country and, accordingly, the export from it. Quite an effective way of influencing, since the volume of foreign trade can form an impressive share of GDP.
• The measure will not be effective enough only if the state is quite capable of providing itself, for example, with the same food or everyday goods. In addition, contrary to the expectations of opponents, the economic isolation of Russia can have a beneficial effect on the general state of the economy and even contribute to its enhanced growth due to the development of private entrepreneurship, small and medium-sized businesses.
• A ban on the circulation of certain categories of goods with a country subject to sanctions. This measure implies the cessation of imports and exports of, for example, weapons or high-tech products. Here the consequences are similar to the application of the embargo measure, and will have tangible results in the case of the total dependence of the disgraced state on these products and the impossibility of finding a replacement for it.
• The third way to economically stifle Russia is to impose restrictions on its part on the activities of financial institutions, organizations, companies and investors from third countries who dare to continue relations with organizations and firms of the rogue state. This applies, for example, to investments in business or construction, the provision of technical support services for complex equipment, questions and advice on supporting production, and so on. Thus, they get a spoke in the wheel from the initiator of the sanctions. Since directly by law you cannot oblige a third party to stop beneficial cooperation.
• Financial restrictions in relation to organizations, institutions or individual citizens of the offending state, which involve the arrest or freezing of their bank accounts or other assets and other actions of a similar nature.

Economic measures can have global consequences for an isolated state, and pose a serious threat to the well-being and existing standard of living of citizens. In particular, many experts associate the economic crisis in Russia with the negative consequences of the application of sanctions by Western countries, while others argue that the crisis was provoked mainly by a decrease in world oil prices.

Political sanctions against Russia

The measures of political influence in relation to a country whose actions cause rejection by another state or the world community are the following:

• Break of diplomatic relations, recall of ambassadors and consuls. What this leads to: the level of interaction between political subjects of the international level is significantly deteriorating, communications, contacts and international relations are collapsing, and it is difficult to resolve important issues of the foreign policy of both states.
• Measures of a social and sports orientation - restrictions for participants in international competitions, olympiads, competitions, and so on. Someone else claims that sport is free from politics! This is no longer the case, and the past Olympic Games are a direct confirmation of this! Against the backdrop of such a politicization of sports, one involuntarily wonders how deeply politics has penetrated into all spheres of our life.
• Restrictions imposed on individuals - citizens of the offending states. This is usually a partial or complete ban on entry for citizens suspected of committing antisocial or illegal acts. Or simply those whose public or socio-political activities for a number of reasons do not suit the initiator of the application of sanctions.

Political sanctions are the termination of all types of international cooperation and a kind of boycott of relations with Russia, which, however, are not capable of causing such significant damage compared to the effect of economic restrictions. Nevertheless, in an already difficult political situation, it becomes especially difficult to look for ways to resolve it and quickly resolve emerging issues, both for one side and the other.

Sanctions USA v. RF

The first to impose sanctions against the Russian Federation in connection with the support of Crimea, which declared its independence and intention to become part of the Russian Federation, was the United States of America. The explanation for such a political decision is that unacceptable interference in the internal affairs of another sovereign state, Ukraine, was seen in the actions of the Russian side.

The reasons that served as the basis for the imposition of sanctions against the Russian Federation

It should be noted that from the very beginning of the destabilization of the situation in the former Soviet republic, the United States supported the opposition. The goal was to seize the Ukrainian bridgehead in the event of a proposed change in the political system and use the advantageous proximity of Ukraine to the Russian Federation. Thus, by the time the annexation of Crimea began, a situation had developed in which the newly-minted government had to challenge the sovereignty of Ukraine, the legitimacy of whose power the Russian side, for obvious reasons, could not recognize.

In this regard, Russia could not consider the new rulers, who came to power through a military coup d'état, as full-fledged subjects of international law. And also to take into consideration their claims regarding the illegality of the actions of the Crimean Republic, which made a politically significant decision to secede from Ukraine by popular vote.

For an unclear reason, the United States supported it in every possible way on the issue of the legitimacy of the claims of the new Ukrainian authorities regarding Crimea. It is precisely in this that the interest of the superpower can be traced, which, unlike the Russian side, for some reason was not embarrassed by the fact of a coup d'état. The United States recognized the new government of Ukraine as legal.

Thus, the actions of the Russian Federation automatically fell into the category of those contrary to international law, with all the ensuing consequences. And the United States actually confirmed its involvement and assistance in destabilizing the situation in Ukraine in order to achieve a change in the ruling regime.

What sanctions were applied against the Russian Federation

The United States of America, together with Canada, imposed restrictive sanctions against the Russian Federation on March 17, 2014, at the height of the Crimean Spring. Seeing that the events in Ukraine are not developing according to the developed scenario (the very fact of participation and sponsorship of the coup by the West is no longer in doubt), it was decided to use additional levers of influence on the Russian Federation. The real purpose of the application of sanctions was to force Russia not to interfere in the process of change of power in the former Soviet republic, which would allow it to be fully controlled.

The introduction of restrictive measures took place in the conditions of the beginning of the revival of the Russian economy, thereby representing a rather tangible blow to its development. The United States also at that moment had strong economic ties with Russian companies, which were sacrificed for purely political reasons of the leadership.

The first to fall under sanctions against the Russian Federation were influential Russian political and public figures involved, according to the US intelligence services, in what is happening in Ukraine. In total - 11 people, and the legitimate president of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych was among them! And although this involvement was not even slightly substantiated or confirmed by facts, this did not affect the decision-making in any way. For this circle of persons, a ban on entry into the United States was indicated, as well as a blocking of assets and bank accounts in financial and other institutions falling under the jurisdiction of the States.

The blacklisted Russian citizens did not have any property or assets in the United States, nor did they plan to visit in the foreseeable future. About which an official statement was made in response to the restrictions adopted against them. The United States, in turn, responded by saying that in case of non-compliance with the instructions, the circle of people could be significantly expanded.

Where can I get money to start my own business? This is the problem faced by 95% of new entrepreneurs! In the article, we have revealed the most relevant ways of obtaining start-up capital for an entrepreneur. We also recommend that you carefully study the results of our experiment in exchange earnings:

This was done after the referendum in Crimea, which resulted in the decision to secede from Ukraine. The United States has replenished the sanctions portfolio with 19 more citizens of the Russian Federation and Crimea. Among them were not only politicians, but also big businessmen who had nothing to do with political affairs at all. However, they were close to President V.V. Putin, and thus it was planned to put pressure on him. In July 2014, sanctions against the Russian Federation affected the heads and managers of the largest Russian enterprises in the defense and raw materials sectors.

The United States sanctions lists against Russian citizens and organizations were regularly updated until September 2016, and this is most likely not the end, since the duration of the sanctions is not defined. Some US sanctions against the Russian Federation relating to military and space cooperation, as well as some of the most important areas of joint activity, have been lifted or softened. In total, for September, the black list includes hundreds of individuals and legal entities from Russia, Ukraine and Crimea.

Currently, the US government is considering options to introduce new sanctions against the Russian Federation in connection with military operations in Syria. Officials argue that such a policy of influencing the Russian Federation is quite effective. On the other hand, they also acknowledge the indisputable fact that no significant changes in the policy of the Russian Federation in relation to what is happening in Ukraine have been achieved as a result of the application of such measures. This once again confirms the importance for the States of the very fact of applying restrictions against Russia in order to demonstrate their superiority.

EU sanctions against Russiaand participation of other countries

The states of the European Union, in fact, in their entirety supported the restrictive measures against the Russian Federation under pressure from the United States. The economies of many of them were hit hard as a result of Russia's retaliatory measures. However, in their opinion, they could suffer more serious damage if they took the opposite side. In turn, Europe, by analogy with the States, has restricted entry for a number of persons, the list of which is being replenished to this day.

Also, their accounts are subject to freezing and assets are blocked if they are in the territory of European countries that have adopted sanctions against the Russian Federation. A little later, Australia, Japan and a number of other states joined the restrictive measures against Russia, whose cooperation with the United States is of global importance for the economy and political weight in the world.

The US and the EU, in an attempt to isolate the Russian Federation as much as possible from the rest of the world, promoted their policy of sanctions among all other countries. They connected the UN, which repeatedly made appeals with anti-Russian appeals. As a result, even Switzerland, which is not a member of the EU and always prefers neutrality, accepted the imposition of sanctions against the Russian Federation! However, the majority of participants in the world community failed to enlist support - this is South America, all of Asia (excluding Japan), the African continent and the Arabian Peninsula.

RF response and consequences

The first response to the sanctions against the Russian Federation by the United States and the West was the food embargo affecting them all, which came into force in August 2014. The Russian food embargo is in effect until the end of 2018, and may be extended further.

This measure hit the economies of a number of countries, a fair share of GDP of which was formed precisely thanks to food exports: for example, Poland, whose main consumer of agricultural products was Russia. For this reason, some European states do not support new sanctions against the Russian Federation and advocate the abolition or mitigation of existing ones.

Turkey, a favorite holiday destination for Russians, has lost the lion's share of the income received annually thanks to the multimillion-dollar flow of Russian tourists. Turkey also supplied the Russian Federation with a huge amount of food and consumer goods.

This was followed by the creation of its own list of foreign persons contributing to the promotion of anti-Russian policies and sentiments. By analogy, similar restrictions are applied to them, as in the case of US and EU sanctions against the Russian Federation. In September 2016, one of the results of the sanctions actions was the suspension of the fulfillment of obligations by the Russian side of the agreement with the United States on the disposal of weapons-grade plutonium.

Refusing to import from Europe, the Russian Federation made up for this shortcoming by expanding the scope of trade with the regions of Southeast Asia, Latin and South America. It is noteworthy that the volume of food imports from the same Argentina and Brazil increased by half a year before the introduction of anti-Russian sanctions.

Another positive point is that import substitution in the Russian Federation had a positive effect on the rise of the domestic agricultural industry. Although the industry had been developing quite dynamically before, the inexpensive and high-quality products of foreign competitors deprived Russian farmers of a fair share of their profits.

Against the background of the imposition of sanctions against Russia, the country has further strengthened relations with friendly trading partners of the East, in particular, with China. Many Asian states have refused to impose sanctions against the Russian Federation, citing close cooperation in economic and political terms.

EU sanctions against the Russian Federation have caused extremely unfavorable economic consequences and many disagreements among the countries of the European Union. The damage inflicted on the economy is incommensurable with any positive aspects of this policy, which cannot be singled out at all. In this regard, the states of Europe seriously thought about the problem that caused the initial introduction of restrictions by the United States against the Russian Federation.

In particular, states that are less dependent on the influence of the United States have taken an active position in favor of lifting or limiting sanctions against Russia. For example, Cyprus, which has been hit hard by the lack of Russian tourists, is calling for a reconsideration of decisions in order to return to the previous relations as soon as possible and stabilize its economy.

The Czech Republic, from the very beginning of the application of sanctions against the Russian Federation, was on the side of the United States in terms of assessing what is happening in Ukraine, but later changed its position to the exact opposite. Many countries are calling for a constructive dialogue with the Russian government in order to find a way out of the new crisis brewing in Europe through joint efforts.

A number of EU states openly assert that the hastily adopted decisions were not justified by the real need to apply such measures, or their consequences simply turned out to be catastrophic. The expected onset of any positive changes does not occur.

Also, despite the US sanctions against the Russian Federation or bypassing them, foreign investment in previously launched projects in Russia does not stop. The vast majority of foreign companies that have partnership relations with Russian enterprises continue mutually beneficial cooperation, despite political differences between the governments of their countries.

Economic sanctions against Russia - excursion into history

This is not the first time that the Russian Federation has been subjected to non-coercive influence from the West in order to weaken the economy or hinder its growth, undermine the state system, or attempt to force a change in foreign policy. The first economic sanctions against Russia were introduced back in 1925, during the Soviet era, when the US and Europe refused to accept gold as payment, demanding oil, timber or grain. Russia at that time, after the revolution and the collapse of the economy, was in great need of imported equipment, technologies and a number of goods. And also the task was to stop being a raw materials appendage for the West.

In 1929, an embargo was introduced on the export of any goods in general, except for grain! Thus, the countries of the West tried in every possible way to impede the industrial growth of the then young Soviet state. Naturally, the developed capitalist world could not come to terms with the emergence of the communist system in one of the world's major powers. Sanctions against the USSR continued to operate until 1934.

After the end of World War II, the States also sought to weaken the USSR by introducing a policy of preventing the export of technology to the country in order to artificially slow down the industrialization of the USSR and assert its superiority. As we know from history, the Cold War created an unprecedented tension between the two world powers. America then saw in the face of the USSR an extremely strong rival. However, the containment policy did not bring any significant results in the end. Although in technology the Soviet Union, of course, lagged behind the progressive West.

A notable event that accompanied the entry of Soviet troops into Afghanistan was the US boycott of the Olympic Games then held in Moscow. As a result, American athletes did not participate in them. Attempts by the United States to persuade European countries to ignore the games only led to the refusal of some athletes to participate. The countries of Europe offered their own Olympic committees to make the decisions and for the most part supported the games. In response, the USSR boycotted the next games in Los Angeles.

Will there be new sanctions against the Russian Federation?

Today's measures against Russia are a repetition of methods already tested for decades. To this day, the question of who lost more from the imposition of sanctions remains quite controversial. Perhaps the States did not initially count on the result, but the very fact of demonstrating their strength and determination is important to them, which they have been showing for half a century in various regions of the planet. In the case of the Russian Federation, military operations are extremely unprofitable and dangerous, so “coercion” measures were chosen through various frauds.

The latest sanctions against the Russian Federation in connection with Crimea have become the most ambitious in terms of the number of countries involved. Here the matter is explained by the fact that the United States is actually already imposing its will on many states of the world, capturing the global economy through the widespread introduction of its currency and, in general, using its influence. States, fearing to damage their economic stability, are forced to act under the dictates of the United States and take their side. Otherwise, they risk becoming political pariahs themselves.

To date, the following is obvious: the EU sanctions against the Russian Federation, aimed at causing economic damage to the country, have not been successful. In conditions of isolation from the West, Russia has strengthened relations with the East. Also, the rejection of the share of exports of goods, and in particular, food, allowed Russia to reorient the economy towards domestic consumption and support agriculture and domestic production.

Sanctions against the Russian Federation will not lead to a change in its political course. This was announced by the head of the Russian state in response to the first restrictions. In addition, the US policy is not supported by any real facts and evidence that could justify the legitimacy of the restrictions applied to Russia. As well as exerting pressure on other countries in order to combine efforts in the global infringement of the geopolitical and economic interests of the Russian Federation.

In January 1980, in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, US President Jimmy Carter announced the imposition of sanctions against the USSR. The first package of sanctions was sensitive, but not fatal for the Soviet economy. The United States stopped issuing licenses for the sale of high technology to the USSR, the export of American goods was restricted, all joint cultural and economic activities were frozen, and Soviet ships were prohibited from fishing in US waters.

In December 1981, President Ronald Reagan announced the introduction of a second package of sanctions against the USSR. The reason was "the introduction of a state of emergency in Poland." New sanctions have affected the electronics and oil and gas sectors. American companies were forbidden to supply the corresponding equipment and technologies to the USSR. A little later, an exception was made for a number of agreements concluded before the imposition of sanctions. This made it possible to complete one of the two planned branches of the Soviet export gas pipeline Urengoy - Pomary - Uzhgorod.

Taking into account the ongoing war in Afghanistan, the USSR did not use a full-scale military invasion according to the scenario of Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968 to suppress anti-government demonstrations in Poland. Instead, power in Warsaw passed to Military Council of National Salvation, which, under the control of the USSR and with the support of the Soviet “Voentorg”, unleashed a wave of hybrid repressions in the country. The direct participation of the USSR in these events was not formally recognized, which did not prevent the United States from responding by imposing new sanctions.

In June 1982, the US authorities tightened the embargo, extending the ban not only on the products of American firms, but also on equipment manufactured by their affiliates abroad and by foreign companies under American licenses. In November 1982, the list of export restrictions against the USSR was further expanded. Restrictions were also introduced on concessional lending to the USSR.

The sanctions policy was complex. The Coordinating Committee for Export Control (KOCOM), which includes 17 Western states, developed a strategy of "controlled technological backwardness", according to which equipment and technology could be sold to socialist countries no earlier than four years after their serial production. In parallel with technological restrictions, a long-term program was launched to reduce the energy dependence of Western European states on the USSR. Today, more than a quarter of the energy in the European Union is produced from renewable sources.

The USSR reacted to the restrictive policy of the West with traditional statements about double standards, injustice and absurdity of the accusations. Inside the country, the population was explained that the sanctions were an attempt at unfair competition by a geopolitical adversary. The actions of the USSR were presented as mirroring those of the United States, and the sanctions were interpreted as an attempt to limit the independent foreign policy of the USSR.

An atmosphere of "we don't care about sanctions" was propagated in the country. With bravura reports of exactly how we spit on Western restrictions. Gradually, the anti-sanctions policy spread to all spheres of public life, including culture and sports.

It cannot be said that the Soviet authorities did not imagine the long-term consequences of the US sanctions policy. They just thought in terms of world war with the West. Within the framework of this war, the renunciation of power control of neighboring countries in exchange for the lifting of sanctions was not considered in principle. This is defeat, capitulation, and a geopolitical catastrophe that cannot be tolerated. Instead, an asymmetric response was planned by the Soviet secret services, which in the long run led to the defeat of the West.

Yuri Bezmenov describes in detail the subversive activities of the KGB in the United States in his 1984 interview. For those who do not know English, there are Russian subtitles in the interview.

Yuri Bezmenov - a specialist in Soviet propaganda, disinformation and subversion, a KGB officer, worked under the guise of the Novosti Press Agency at the USSR Embassy in India. In 1970 he fled to Canada, where he lived for some time under a different name. After the KGB exposed him, he publicly disclosed some information about Soviet propaganda and sabotage activities in other countries.

Below is a short quote from the interview, which explains the essence of the asymmetric response of the USSR in the confrontation with the United States.

Indoctrination or psychological warfare is a public process that is easy to follow. It means influencing the perception of the reality of each person in such a way that, despite the abundance of information, people do not have the opportunity to draw reasonable conclusions that would be in the interests of their loved ones, their immediate environment and their native state.

Similar things are happening in the US. When the people lead the state to a crisis, choosing a government that bombards people with promises of an earthly paradise. If one succeeds in destabilizing the economy, changing the concept of the free market, and creating a government led by a "kind" dictator who makes many promises that are not actually expected to be kept, then there is nothing to create the illusion that the situation is under control. A whole generation of people is being nurtured who are sure that they live in times of prosperity and peace. At the same time, in reality, the United States lives in a state of constant, undeclared, total war, and the initiator of this war is not an external enemy, but the world communist system.

The USSR tried to destroy the USA before the USA destroys the USSR. No other result of the confrontation between the two superpowers was considered in the Kremlin. Last time the United States won, this time there is every chance to take revenge. Former Chekists really think like that. This is more important for them than the health of their loved ones, the well-being of their immediate environment and the interests of their native state. Rather, this is how they saw the interests of the USSR and now they see the interests of the Russian Federation. And they are ready to sacrifice the lives and well-being of their own citizens in order to achieve these interests.

COCOM decided to partially lift restrictions on the supply of goods to the USSR and the countries of Eastern Europe in May 1991. By the end of this year, the USSR, CMEA and the Warsaw Pact ceased to exist. This is not so much the result of sanctions, but the payment for the attempt of the Soviet leadership to implement a utopian idea, regardless of the cost of this implementation.

TASS-DOSIER. On September 25, 2018, the US Department of Commerce announced a decision to impose sanctions on 12 Russian companies that, from the point of view of Washington, act contrary to the interests of the national security of the United States. Aerocomposite, Divetechnoservice, Research and Production Enterprise (NPP) Gamma, Research Institute Vector, Nilco Group (Nilco Group), Obninsk Research and Production Enterprise Tekhnologiya were blacklisted. , research and production enterprise of underwater technologies "Okeanos", design bureau "Aviadvigatel", group of companies "Infotex", companies "Cyrus Systems", Research and Production Corporation "Systems of Precision Instrumentation" and Voronezh Research Institute "Vega". For all these organizations, the so-called presumption of refusal to export American dual-use products will now apply. Reasons for the restrictions include facilitating "the activities of malicious Russian actors in cyberspace", "supplying equipment and providing support to the Russian Navy", and "supporting the Russian military aerospace industry". The sanctions are expected to come into effect on 26 September.

On August 2, 2017, US President Donald Trump signed the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), which consolidated the restrictive measures against Russia (as well as Iran and North Korea) adopted by previous administrations, and introduced additional ones. Thus, in the Russian part of this document, the demands to punish the Russian Federation for actions in Crimea and Donbass were supplemented with accusations of human rights violations “in the occupied territory”, supplying weapons to the Syrian government, undermining US cybersecurity, interference in the 2016 American elections, corruption and other The law provides for the freezing of assets and complicating the process of obtaining loans by Russian enterprises, and also extends sanctions to individuals and legal entities of third countries cooperating with companies from Russia or investing in projects with Russian participation of more than 33% (these measures apply to projects in any country in the world, issued after January 29, 2018). In addition, the law deprived the American president of the right to soften and lift sanctions without the approval of Congress (previously they were introduced, adjusted and removed by presidential decrees).

In January 2018, in addition to the law (which entered into force on January 29), a list was published, which received the name "Kremlin" in the media. Members of the Russian government were included in it, including Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, the leadership of the presidential administration, heads of a number of state corporations and state banks, as well as businessmen whose fortune, according to American sources, is $ 1 billion or more - a total of 210 people. They are not subject to any restrictions or prohibitions, but being included in this list may become the basis for the possible imposition of sanctions in the future.

On September 13, 2018, Donald Trump signed an executive order to automatically impose sanctions on foreign individuals and companies found to interfere in the 2018 midterm congressional elections, and on September 20, an executive order to tighten enforcement of the U.S. sanctions regime against Russia over with "aggression in Ukraine".

The first sanctions lists were published in October and December 2017 and came into force with the CAATSA law. Then there were lists compiled on the basis of various articles of this law in connection with allegations of a threat to US national security, interference in US elections, cyber attacks, and so on. In particular, they include the Kalashnikov and Izhmash concerns, the MiG corporation, the Sukhoi and Russian Helicopters companies, the defense enterprises Novator Experimental Design Bureau. Blacklisted