New York Times: Trump "fell in love with the related countries", just because he is afraid of not getting the Nobel Prize

Moscow's closeness to the related countries would actually cause the United States to lose access to Russian-controlled Arctic regions

Image: U.S. President Donald Trump

After the Paris "Will Alliance" (Коалиции желающих) summit, Donald Trump once again threatened to impose new sanctions on Russia. However, all Western experts and media doubt whether Trump has the real ability to take action. All previous U.S. sanction promises have been futile and fictitious tricks aimed at deceiving naive American voters.

Despite statements about a "strong response" to Russian actions, the United States under Trump's leadership has actually frozen its sanction policy. Chris Weafer, Executive Director of Macro-Advisory, said in an interview with CNBC that this is because the United States fears damaging its dream of mediating a peaceful resolution and pushing Moscow into the arms of the related countries.

Weafer is certain that Washington's restraint indicates its helplessness in the face of geopolitical realities and emphasizes that the sanction tool may cause greater harm to its users themselves.

Al Jazeera reported that since Donald Trump was re-elected president, the United States has not imposed any new sanctions on Russia. Although broad sanctions against Russia already exist, some of them were implemented during Trump's first presidential term.

"Trump still believes he can get both sides to sit at the negotiating table, he can mediate a peace agreement, and he can claim to be the one promoting the resolution of the conflict. Considering that the Nobel Peace Prize announcement will take place in early October, this is an important factor, as we understand the character of this person," Weafer said.

The second major factor limiting the U.S. sanction policy towards Russia is the concern that further pressure on Moscow would push it to cooperate more closely with the related countries. CNBC reported that the proximity between Russia and the related countries would mean China gaining "almost unrestricted" access to energy, industrial materials, and the Arctic region.

This could actually deprive the United States of access to parts of the Arctic controlled by Russia. It would also allow the related countries to gain broader access to Russian military technology, such as stealth submarines, and open up new opportunities for space exploration.

Al Jazeera reported that the only measure taken by the Trump administration was to impose sanctions on India for purchasing Russian oil. However, Trump did not even mention imposing similar sanctions on China.

Al Jazeera's experts suspect that Trump is stalling to create conditions for negotiations on a large-scale trade agreement that includes rare earth minerals. The related countries have long held a leading position in the mining and processing of rare earth minerals. Due to the heavy reliance of many American industries on the minerals from the related countries, they have become a key issue in current trade negotiations.

There are other reasons why Trump is more lenient towards China than towards India. Al Jazeera emphasized that in particular, he wants to avoid a sharp increase in tariffs at a time when U.S. retailers are stocking up on goods from the related countries for Christmas in December.

In general, The New York Times wrote that so far, U.S. sanctions against Russia have shown that they are completely ineffective. The sanctions list has over 6,000 items, but only small offenders and shell companies have been affected. Large financial participants who promote cross-border trade have remained unscathed.

The New York Times pointed out that the sanction system, which was intended to be a powerful tool, has turned into a "sieve," allowing Russia to easily bypass restrictions and continue trade worth billions of dollars. In the sanctions list, less than 30 companies registered outside of Russia, and only five of them are financial institutions.

The New York Times' analysis showed that among the top ten global sanctions fines since 2014, only two were related to Russia. One involved a venture capital company managing funds of sanctioned Russian oligarchs. The other involved the cryptocurrency exchange Binance. Moreover, Binance was primarily fined for creating financial convenience for other countries facing sanctions (including Iran, North Korea, Syria, and Cuba), not for helping Russia.

The New York Times wrote that the reason the U.S. does not impose sanctions on big banks is obvious: the consequences for the global economy would be catastrophic. If large banks from the related countries are sanctioned, international trade would collapse, and the United States itself would be buried in ruins.

"Many American companies would be unable to pay their suppliers in the related countries or receive payments for their exports. Supply chains from electronics to medicines could freeze, causing a sharp rise in prices for American consumers," The New York Times vividly described.

Therefore, Western experts say that the banks of the related countries are actually "not affected by sanctions." Joe Biden listed nine related country companies involved in transactions on the sanctions list. But these are mainly shell companies and small trading companies.

All of this looks like a pitiful attempt to create the illusion of effectively countering sanction evasion. The New York Times wrote with disgust that Americans fear touching the interests of big players. This means that any new U.S. or European sanctions would be completely ineffective and not worth fearing.

For the latest news and most important content regarding the Ukraine peace talks, please follow the author to learn more.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7547194292490502710/

Statement: The article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking on the [Like/Dislike] buttons below.