Obama's Powerless Measures Don't Scare Putin
Published in Ziare
(Romania) on 30 April 2014
by Ana Ilie (link to original)
Vladimir Putin’s relentless attack on Ukraine is becoming desperate, according to the American press.
The forces working with the Russian individuals in eastern Ukraine are torturing people and keeping OSCE observers as hostages. In return, Barack Obama’s response was slow and extremely reserved. According to the Washington Post, the new sanctions imposed by the U.S. on Monday did not match those announced three weeks ago, when the Russian attack first began.
In these conditions, it’s no wonder Obama himself said he was skeptical about their effect. “We don’t expect there to be an immediate change in Russia’s policy,” a representative of the White House stated, admitting that the U.S. is perfectly able to take measures meant to cause “severe damage on the Russian economy,” but is choosing not to.
The aforementioned publication is wondering why America is reluctant to make an immediate change to Russia’s behavior, which supports murder, torture and the taking of hostages.
Obama explained that the sanctions that target Putin’s businesses and the firms of those close to him are “calibrated” to “change his calculus.” Just as with the failed attempt to change the calculations of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, the White House assumes that a leader who’s involved in territorial aggression can be gently guided through powerless sanctions. This strategy would have been worth trying when the crisis in Ukraine had just begun, at the end of February, but the Russian president, just like Assad, laughed in the face of American diplomacy and completely ignored the de-escalation agreement accepted by his minister of foreign affairs in Geneva.
American officials say that the sanctions against Russia’s banks and energy and mining industry are held as backup, to discourage a possible Russian invasion in Ukraine. However, this seems to imply that the annexation of Crimea is a done deal and it minimizes and ignores Moscow’s brutal efforts to create chaos in the eastern provinces.
Moreover, Russia has already invaded Ukraine, as even the White House confirms, admitting that “Russia’s involvement in the recent violence in eastern Ukraine is indisputable.”
A better explanation came from a high official who stated that the administration does not wish to act without the support of the European Union, which, on Monday, announced only minimal sanctions. Moreover, the Obama administration needs to consider “the effect on the global economy,” which suggests that America’s sanction policy is “calibrated” less for saving Ukraine and more for avoiding measures that could cause problems in Brussels or would otherwise affect America’s economic growth during the election year (in 2014 there is a Congressional election).
All these represent legitimate reasons, but, as the Washington Post agrees, they should be overcome by the necessity of a firm position against forcibly changing borders in Europe.
The forces working with the Russian individuals in eastern Ukraine are torturing people and keeping OSCE observers as hostages. In return, Barack Obama’s response was slow and extremely reserved. According to the Washington Post, the new sanctions imposed by the U.S. on Monday did not match those announced three weeks ago, when the Russian attack first began.
In these conditions, it’s no wonder Obama himself said he was skeptical about their effect. “We don’t expect there to be an immediate change in Russia’s policy,” a representative of the White House stated, admitting that the U.S. is perfectly able to take measures meant to cause “severe damage on the Russian economy,” but is choosing not to.
The aforementioned publication is wondering why America is reluctant to make an immediate change to Russia’s behavior, which supports murder, torture and the taking of hostages.
Obama explained that the sanctions that target Putin’s businesses and the firms of those close to him are “calibrated” to “change his calculus.” Just as with the failed attempt to change the calculations of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, the White House assumes that a leader who’s involved in territorial aggression can be gently guided through powerless sanctions. This strategy would have been worth trying when the crisis in Ukraine had just begun, at the end of February, but the Russian president, just like Assad, laughed in the face of American diplomacy and completely ignored the de-escalation agreement accepted by his minister of foreign affairs in Geneva.
American officials say that the sanctions against Russia’s banks and energy and mining industry are held as backup, to discourage a possible Russian invasion in Ukraine. However, this seems to imply that the annexation of Crimea is a done deal and it minimizes and ignores Moscow’s brutal efforts to create chaos in the eastern provinces.
Moreover, Russia has already invaded Ukraine, as even the White House confirms, admitting that “Russia’s involvement in the recent violence in eastern Ukraine is indisputable.”
A better explanation came from a high official who stated that the administration does not wish to act without the support of the European Union, which, on Monday, announced only minimal sanctions. Moreover, the Obama administration needs to consider “the effect on the global economy,” which suggests that America’s sanction policy is “calibrated” less for saving Ukraine and more for avoiding measures that could cause problems in Brussels or would otherwise affect America’s economic growth during the election year (in 2014 there is a Congressional election).
All these represent legitimate reasons, but, as the Washington Post agrees, they should be overcome by the necessity of a firm position against forcibly changing borders in Europe.
Previous article![]( "Washington Will Not Apologize")
