Post by no sanctions on May 7, 2023 13:35:43 GMT -8
www.moonofalabama.org/2023/05/on-the-hypocrisy-of-the-new-eu-sanction-regime.html
On The Hypocrisy Of The New EU Sanction Regime
Once upon a time the European Union rejected secondary sanctions which the U.S. used to press third party countries to follow its sanction regimes against other once:
Making use of the centrality of the US in the global economy, it has imposed ‘secondary sanctions’ on foreign firms, which are forced to choose between trading with US sanctions targets or forfeiting access to the lucrative US market. In addition, the US has penalized foreign firms for breaching US sanctions legislation.
To counter these extraterritorial measures the EU introduced a blocking mechanism:
The lawfulness of these sanctions could be contested before various domestic and international judicial mechanisms, although each mechanism comes with its own limitations. To counter the adverse effects of secondary sanctions, third states and the EU can also make use of, and have already made use of, various non-judicial mechanisms, such as blocking statutes, special purpose vehicles to circumvent the reach of sanctions, or even countermeasures.
Blocking statutes prohibit EU companies from complying with U.S. sanctions:
Pursuant to Art. 5(1) of the EU Blocking Regulation, EU operators are prohibited from complying “with any requirement or prohibition, including requests of foreign courts, based on or resulting, directly or indirectly” from a set of foreign sanctions laws deemed to apply extraterritorially by the European Union, “or from actions based thereon or resulting therefrom.” The laws in question are listed in the Regulation’s Annex; currently, all are US statutes. Art. 5(2) provides that the European Commission (the Commission) may, upon request, authorize EU operators to comply fully or partially with these laws, to the extent that noncompliance would seriously damage their interests or those of the European Union.
In 2018, the Commission updated the Annex of the EU Blocking Regulation to include the (reimposed) US secondary sanctions against Iran. It also adopted an Implementing Regulation laying down the criteria that would be taken into account for the granting of compliance authorizations, and issued a Guidance Note on the application of the reactivated EU Blocking Regulation.
The blocking statute was used to reject sanctions the U.S. instated against Iran after the U.S. left the nuclear agreement.
Now however, the conflict in Ukraine has seemingly killed any resistance in the EU against illegal acts from the U.S. In fact the EU has now gone mad and is itself considering the introduction of extraterritorial measures against countries which do not follow its own sanction regime against Russia:
The European Union is discussing a new sanctions mechanism to target third countries it believes aren’t doing enough to prevent Russia from evading sanctions, particularly those that can’t explain spikes in trade of key goods or technologies, according to people familiar with the matter.
The primary aim of the tool would be to deter countries from helping Russia and crack down on trade channels that Moscow may be exploiting, the people said. If that doesn’t work, the bloc would have the option as a second step of imposing targeted restrictions on key goods.
...
The new enforcement mechanism, aspects of which were first reported by the Financial Times, would give member states the authority to create two lists — one of affected third countries and the other of banned goods.
If the mechanism is approved by national governments, decisions on which countries and goods to list would be for member states to take unanimously, the people said. The measures were unlikely to target China at first, but focus mostly on nations in central Asia and Russia’s immediate neighbors, the people added.
Elsewhere, the proposed package would make it easier to sanction companies in third countries that are circumventing the EU’s sanctions.
The EU politicians and bureaucrats in Brussels are killing their own moral defense against the U.S. application of secondary sanctions against third parties.
How will they ever be able to again argue for their own blocking statute. Moreover what will they do when third party countries, like Turkey or China, introduce their own blocking statutes against secondary EU sanctions on their companies?
Posted by b on May 4, 2023
www.moonofalabama.org/2023/05/nearly-a-third-of-the-world-economy-is-now-subject-to-sanctions.html
'Nearly A Third Of The World Economy Is Now Subject To Sanctions'
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) just published a study about:
The Human Consequences of Economic Sanctions.
The results are as any observer of such acts would expect. Sanctions are used too broadly. They hardly ever serve their supposed original purpose and do not reach their aims. They hurt the poor more than the supposedly targeted leaders of this or that country.
These numbers though are astonishing:
Over the past six decades, there has been significant growth in the use of economic sanctions by Western powers and international organizations. Less than 4 percent of countries were subject to sanctions imposed by the United States, European Union, or United Nations in the early 1960s; today, that share has risen to 27 percent. The magnitudes are similar when we consider their impact on the global economy: the share of world GDP produced in sanctioned countries rose from less than 4 percent to 29 percent in the same period. In other words, more than one fourth of countries and nearly a third of the world economy is now subject to sanctions by the UN or Western nations.
Under international law only sanction imposed by the United Nations' Security Council have legal standing. Sanctions by the U.S. or EU are under international law an illegal use of state instruments. The U.S. is using sanctions constantly to press under nations to do its bidding. Until the recent war in Ukraine the EU has used sanctions mostly to 'do something' because it had run out of ideas or diplomatic abilities.
The recent sanctions on Russia proved to be hurting the Russians much less than they are hurting the people living in the European Union. It was a catastrophic mistake by EU leaders to preemptively agree to the sanctions the U.S. had been pushing for before Russia entered the civil war in Ukraine on the side of its Ukrainian brethren. The consequences had obviously not been gamed out and thought through.
When nearly one third of the world economy is under sanctions the other two-third are losing out too. It would therefore make sense for everyone to abolish all sanctions that have not been issued by the UNSC. Even UNSC sanctions should only be used sparsely and in a very narrowly targeted manner. Sanctions that hit the whole economy of a country are inhuman and should be prohibited.
Posted by b on May 5, 2023
On The Hypocrisy Of The New EU Sanction Regime
Once upon a time the European Union rejected secondary sanctions which the U.S. used to press third party countries to follow its sanction regimes against other once:
Making use of the centrality of the US in the global economy, it has imposed ‘secondary sanctions’ on foreign firms, which are forced to choose between trading with US sanctions targets or forfeiting access to the lucrative US market. In addition, the US has penalized foreign firms for breaching US sanctions legislation.
To counter these extraterritorial measures the EU introduced a blocking mechanism:
The lawfulness of these sanctions could be contested before various domestic and international judicial mechanisms, although each mechanism comes with its own limitations. To counter the adverse effects of secondary sanctions, third states and the EU can also make use of, and have already made use of, various non-judicial mechanisms, such as blocking statutes, special purpose vehicles to circumvent the reach of sanctions, or even countermeasures.
Blocking statutes prohibit EU companies from complying with U.S. sanctions:
Pursuant to Art. 5(1) of the EU Blocking Regulation, EU operators are prohibited from complying “with any requirement or prohibition, including requests of foreign courts, based on or resulting, directly or indirectly” from a set of foreign sanctions laws deemed to apply extraterritorially by the European Union, “or from actions based thereon or resulting therefrom.” The laws in question are listed in the Regulation’s Annex; currently, all are US statutes. Art. 5(2) provides that the European Commission (the Commission) may, upon request, authorize EU operators to comply fully or partially with these laws, to the extent that noncompliance would seriously damage their interests or those of the European Union.
In 2018, the Commission updated the Annex of the EU Blocking Regulation to include the (reimposed) US secondary sanctions against Iran. It also adopted an Implementing Regulation laying down the criteria that would be taken into account for the granting of compliance authorizations, and issued a Guidance Note on the application of the reactivated EU Blocking Regulation.
The blocking statute was used to reject sanctions the U.S. instated against Iran after the U.S. left the nuclear agreement.
Now however, the conflict in Ukraine has seemingly killed any resistance in the EU against illegal acts from the U.S. In fact the EU has now gone mad and is itself considering the introduction of extraterritorial measures against countries which do not follow its own sanction regime against Russia:
The European Union is discussing a new sanctions mechanism to target third countries it believes aren’t doing enough to prevent Russia from evading sanctions, particularly those that can’t explain spikes in trade of key goods or technologies, according to people familiar with the matter.
The primary aim of the tool would be to deter countries from helping Russia and crack down on trade channels that Moscow may be exploiting, the people said. If that doesn’t work, the bloc would have the option as a second step of imposing targeted restrictions on key goods.
...
The new enforcement mechanism, aspects of which were first reported by the Financial Times, would give member states the authority to create two lists — one of affected third countries and the other of banned goods.
If the mechanism is approved by national governments, decisions on which countries and goods to list would be for member states to take unanimously, the people said. The measures were unlikely to target China at first, but focus mostly on nations in central Asia and Russia’s immediate neighbors, the people added.
Elsewhere, the proposed package would make it easier to sanction companies in third countries that are circumventing the EU’s sanctions.
The EU politicians and bureaucrats in Brussels are killing their own moral defense against the U.S. application of secondary sanctions against third parties.
How will they ever be able to again argue for their own blocking statute. Moreover what will they do when third party countries, like Turkey or China, introduce their own blocking statutes against secondary EU sanctions on their companies?
Posted by b on May 4, 2023
www.moonofalabama.org/2023/05/nearly-a-third-of-the-world-economy-is-now-subject-to-sanctions.html
'Nearly A Third Of The World Economy Is Now Subject To Sanctions'
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) just published a study about:
The Human Consequences of Economic Sanctions.
The results are as any observer of such acts would expect. Sanctions are used too broadly. They hardly ever serve their supposed original purpose and do not reach their aims. They hurt the poor more than the supposedly targeted leaders of this or that country.
These numbers though are astonishing:
Over the past six decades, there has been significant growth in the use of economic sanctions by Western powers and international organizations. Less than 4 percent of countries were subject to sanctions imposed by the United States, European Union, or United Nations in the early 1960s; today, that share has risen to 27 percent. The magnitudes are similar when we consider their impact on the global economy: the share of world GDP produced in sanctioned countries rose from less than 4 percent to 29 percent in the same period. In other words, more than one fourth of countries and nearly a third of the world economy is now subject to sanctions by the UN or Western nations.
Under international law only sanction imposed by the United Nations' Security Council have legal standing. Sanctions by the U.S. or EU are under international law an illegal use of state instruments. The U.S. is using sanctions constantly to press under nations to do its bidding. Until the recent war in Ukraine the EU has used sanctions mostly to 'do something' because it had run out of ideas or diplomatic abilities.
The recent sanctions on Russia proved to be hurting the Russians much less than they are hurting the people living in the European Union. It was a catastrophic mistake by EU leaders to preemptively agree to the sanctions the U.S. had been pushing for before Russia entered the civil war in Ukraine on the side of its Ukrainian brethren. The consequences had obviously not been gamed out and thought through.
When nearly one third of the world economy is under sanctions the other two-third are losing out too. It would therefore make sense for everyone to abolish all sanctions that have not been issued by the UNSC. Even UNSC sanctions should only be used sparsely and in a very narrowly targeted manner. Sanctions that hit the whole economy of a country are inhuman and should be prohibited.
Posted by b on May 5, 2023