Is it actually Russia that is imposing more and more costs?

[fathertime]

While browsing the internet this evening, I ran across a story that has an effect on many of us.  Exxon/Mobil has lost roughly 1 billion dollars because of the back and forth sanctions.  The stock price of both Exxon/Mobil and Chevron have suffered.


http://news.yahoo.com/exxonmobil-says-russia-sanctions-cost-1-bn-153817351.html?soc_src=mail&soc_trk=ma


Fathertime!   

[mendeleyev]

Certain EU countries are preparing to give up their part in Western sanctions. Those nations are Greece, Cyprus and Hungary.

The Russian food safety ministry,  Россельхознадзор (Rosselkhoznadzor), will re-certify food products from those three countries as okay for export to Russia next month. Despite claims of self-reliance, Russian food production has not taken hold as the government had projected, and this will help ease some, but not all, of the shortages created by Russia's declaration of "reverse sanctions."


Rosselkhoznadzor has also announced a new agreement to dramatically increase imports of seafood from Chile. Fish tops beef and chicken on most Russian tables, and this will help ease the shortage of seafood products that had previously been supplied by Finland and the Baltic states. Even with access to several large bodies of water, Russia has never been able to develop and maintain a modern and self reliant seafood industry.

[fathertime]

while browsing the internet i found this article about Russia talking to Nicaragua now...thinking of supplying them with fighter jets.  the article states that is a way for Russia to begin to strike back against what it perceives as US interference in it's backyard...so it is going to start interfering in our backyard.   


http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russia-flexing-muscles-central-america-152100125.html


Russia is flexing its muscles in Central America


(Krasimir Grozev)A Serbian MiG-29Russia has once again started to flex its muscles in a bid to rebuild its influence in the Central American state of Nicaragua, McClatchy DC reports.
Moscow may strike a possible arms deal with Nicaragua that would provide the Central American country with fighter jets.

Although details of the deal have not been revealed, there are rumors in local papers from both countries that suggest that Russia could provide MiG-29 fighter aircraft............

[Steamer]

In a congressional hearing on March 12, 2015, General John Kelly, the head of US Southern Command, said that "Russia is using power projection in an attempt to erode U.S. leadership and challenge U.S. influence in the Western Hemisphere ... Russia has courted Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua to gain access to air bases and ports for resupply of Russian naval assets and strategic bombers operating in the Western Hemisphere."

The Russians have learned from the best about how to stir up crap on the other side of the world. It won't be too long before we're having troubles in central and south America.

[Boethius]

The Russians have learned from the best about how to stir up crap on the other side of the world. It won't be too long before we're having troubles in central and south America.

Right.  Because they never did this before.

[Steamer]

Right.  Because they never did this before.

Sure they did but we raised it to an art form.

[Boethius]

I suggest you read the histories of Ukraine during NEP (which was copied in other republics), and Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia in the immediate postwar period.  Focus on how the elections they were promised were manipulated by the Soviets.  They had the art form before the US knew an art form existed (though I disagree that any of this is an art form).

[fathertime]

The Russians have learned from the best about how to stir up crap on the other side of the world. It won't be too long before we're having troubles in central and south America.

As a retaliatory measure, we can expect a variety of different consequences, obviously none of which is good for us. Overall we  (The US) will be trying to put out brush fires in our own backyard for the foreseeable future now. 


Fathertime!   

[Muzh]

As a retaliatory measure, we can expect a variety of different consequences, obviously none of which is good for us. Overall we  (The US) will be trying to put out brush fires in our own backyard for the foreseeable future now. 


Fathertime!

I don't think so.


It is such a different world from when the US pols told us they had to quell brush fires from our backyard.


There is a new boogieman in the room.

[mendeleyev]

Those McClatchy reporters must be wet behind the ears. Russia/Putin has been at this game for a decade. Putin was exploiting the demise of the Monroe doctrine loooonnng before this.

[fathertime]

I don't think so.


It is such a different world from when the US pols told us they had to quell brush fires from our backyard.


There is a new boogieman in the room.

You may be right, but it is no sure thing.   Russia is visiting Colombia this week, one of our strongest allies in the region...I was under the impression that we had Colombia pretty much in our pocket...


http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Russian-Foreign-Minister-Continues-Latin-America-Tour-20150325-0012.html

Russian Foreign Minister Continues Latin America Tour



Russia’s foreign minister seeks to strengthen ties with Latin American regional integration blocs. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who is currently in Colombia, will continue his four day tour of Latin America on Wednesday. Lavrov visited Cuba prior to his stop in Colombia and will move on next to Nicaragua and Guatemala.  During his official visit to Colombia, Lavrov expressed interest in..........
 




Fathertime!   
 

[mendeleyev]

Russian price inflation rose to 16.9 percent in March, its highest level since 2002, as the country adapts to a sharply weakened ruble and the impact of politically motivated food import bans.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/russian-inflation-surges-to-13-year-high-as-ruble-crisis-stings/518699.html


Alexi Kudrin, Russia's former Minister of the Treasury and still a close family friend to Mr. Putin, is now warning that Russia's frantic buying of the ruble on FOREX exchanges may have seriously threatened the country's strategic reserves.

[msmobyone]

Certain EU countries are preparing to give up their part in Western sanctions. Those nations are Greece, Cyprus and Hungary.

I can only speak with some expertise re Greece and Cyprus- having lived in Cyprus for a long time.

Greece is in a BAD -economically - way and owes a shed load of money to the EU - having falsified accounts - to get in the Eurozone.  It has elected a left of centre - anti-EU austerity measures -  coalition and Greece is 'welcome' to borrow mony from Russia - who can't afford to lend it ... THIS is the only card the Greeks have in negotiations - short of crashing out of the Euzozone - which they don't want.

Cyprus invested in Greece and the EU bailed her banks out by enforcing a 'haircut' - taking a chunk from everyone who had more than 100k Euros - affecting many former FSU folk who had entrusted their funds with Cypriot banks and formed many offshore companies WAY before joining the EU and the Eurozone.

Neither nation is pleased with the austerity measures in place and Cyprus has JUST eneded currency controls.

Cyprus has a right of centre, pragmatic President who wants to walk the middle path and keep all his options open. There is an Orthodox Christian 'bond' between the nations, but Cyprus has been 'occupied' by Turkish forces since 1974 - the Turkish Cypriots call it the 'Peace Operation'.. itis a similar situation to Crimea.... and Greece and Cyprus voted for Ukraine's UN resolution.



Neither wants to leave the EU, really and China is more likely to lend money - knowing they will likely never see it returned.

Sanctions were renewed against Russia in March - for a further six months.

NOTHING can change until mid-Septemeber. 

[jone]

Russian price inflation rose to 16.9 percent in March, its highest level since 2002, as the country adapts to a sharply weakened ruble and the impact of politically motivated food import bans.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/russian-inflation-surges-to-13-year-high-as-ruble-crisis-stings/518699.html


Alexi Kudrin, Russia's former Minister of the Treasury and still a close family friend to Mr. Putin, is now warning that Russia's frantic buying of the ruble on FOREX exchanges may have seriously threatened the country's strategic reserves.

Mendy,

You should point out that the inflation rate quoted is adjusted as an ANNUAL rate, not a monthly rate of inflation. 

[mendeleyev]

Thank you for that correction, Jone. You are right.

[fathertime]

It looks like Russia has helped give renewed life to the Falklands issue between The United Kingdom and Argentina. From what I've been reading Great Britain is in the process of attempting to extract undersea oil from under the Argentinian continental shelf...using The Falklands as an excuse.  If there are indeed vast resources in that area,the United Kingdom  shouldn't be entitled to receive the  potentially massive proceeds because of a sparsely inhabited set of disputed islands off the Argentinian coastline and nearly 8000 miles away from the United Kingdom.


http://news.yahoo.com/falklands-spat-heats-between-britain-argentina-173310205.html;_ylt=AwrXoCHUHSdVCwsAsRrQtDMD;_ylu=X3oDMTByNWU4cGh1BGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--


Fathertime!

[msmobyone]

It looks like Russia has helped give renewed life to the Falklands issue between The United Kingdom and Argentina. From what I've been reading Great Britain is in the process of attempting to extract undersea oil from under the Argentinian continental shelf...using The Falklands as an excuse.  If there are indeed vast resources in that area,the United Kingdom  shouldn't be entitled to receive the  potentially massive proceeds because of a sparsely inhabited set of disputed islands off the Argentinian coastline and nearly 8000 miles away from the United Kingdom.

Hi fathertime

1/ It's the United Kingdom  - not Great Britain ... 

2/ the licences are issued by the FALKLAND ISLAND's Govt... not the British Government

3/ The FALKLANDs are a dependency of the UK and they have cost the UK far more to protect than any possible income... Do TRY to understand the principle ofthe right of the islanders to enjoy freedom from occupation from a nation that has no claim and for whom the islanders have made it QUITE clear they want no part of ....



4/ Licences were granted to private enterprises - many who have failed to make a return on their  investment.

The irony of the Kremlin 'stirring the pot' whilst claiming Crimeans had the right of'self determination' is not lost on most of us ....
 

[fathertime]

Hi msmobyone,

3/ The FALKLANDs are a dependency of the UK and they have cost the UK far more to protect than any possible income... 

 

I really don't think that is an accurate statement....so far they believe there is 60 BILLION barrels of oil in the vicinity.  UK stands to gain a lot directly and indirectly because of this.  Argentina around zilch.  Interesting the South American nations are banding together  on this one, and have banned "The Falklands" flagged ships in their ports. 


http://www.cnbc.com/id/100537413
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/02/16/uk-falklands-oil-idUKTRE81F1LA20120216

  Do TRY to understand the principle ofthe right of the islanders to enjoy freedom from occupation from a nation that has no claim and for whom the islanders have made it QUITE clear they want no part of ....
 

Well obviously Argentina doesn't agree that it has no claim.  The UK's military has been stronger and that is the crux of their stronger claim. Aside from that, UK has populated the islands with a few 1000 in the interim, in part to help strengthen their claim....nevertheless Argentina has never agreed with it, and that being the case may decide to continue to make the UK fight or expend resources in order to hold the land. 


Fathertime!   

[fathertime]

I don't think so.


It is such a different world from when the US pols told us they had to quell brush fires from our backyard.


There is a new boogieman in the room.

Muzh, Did you see what Obama said today at the Summit of Americas today?  I thought it was quite a public admission regarding the meddling we have been guilty of.  It certainly appears we are now cognizant of the growing Chinese competition to our hegemony over the region. 

http://www.reuters.com/video/2015/04/10/obama-days-of-us-meddling-with-impunity?videoId=363811438&videoChannel=1

Fathertime!

[SANDRO43]

This debate about the Falklands is not dissimilar to that over those small, uninhabited islands in the China Sea (Spratlies, etc.) - when the smell of oil is in the air, neighbouring nations suddenly discover 'historical' reasons why the should claim sovereignty over them .

[msmobyone]

Hi msmobyone,


I really don't think that is an accurate statement....so far they believe there is 60 BILLION barrels of oil in the vicinity.  UK stands to gain a lot directly and indirectly because of this.  Argentina around zilch.  Interesting the South American nations are banding together  on this one, and have banned "The Falklands" flagged ships in their ports. 

HI fathertime,

this will be one of the easiest ripostes I ever made...

1/ I include the cost of lives lost - 900 plus

2/ I think you need to check out the UK's defence budget and costings re the RE-TAKING of the Falkands - militarily - and the on-going costs of defence.

3/ Argentina's attempt to close ports to UK shipping is more of a propaganda news item than reality.... Supply ships and military ones visit S.American ports..

http://panampost.com/panam-staff/2014/12/08/uk-ship-in-chile-revives-falklands-controversy-with-argentina/

and Argentina has 'fits' ...

Well obviously Argentina doesn't agree that it has no claim.  The UK's military has been stronger and that is the crux of their stronger claim.

Fathertime, I invite you to check out the 'validity' of Argentina's 'claim' - you are posting 'silly'.. Argentina's 'claim' is laughably tenuous.

ANY chance of a negotiation for 'joint sovereignty' disapated - for generations -  with the invasion of '82

The 1982 invasion came about because the military Junta were deeply unpopular and  needed a diversion - The UK had 'pulled' the last ship patrolling the region and Argentina thought this meant the UK wouldn't defend dependents

I beleive Pres. Putin would have had the Falklands Factor in his mind when arranging the 'return' of Crimea - as Thatcher went from likely to be removed - deep economic woes - to national hero...

[fathertime]

HI fathertime,

this will be one of the easiest ripostes I ever made...

1/ I include the cost of lives lost - 900 plus

2/ I think you need to check out the UK's defence budget and costings re the RE-TAKING of the Falkands - militarily - and the on-going costs of defence.
 

Hola Msmobyone!


The 'costs' of the colonization of the Falklands won't be large compared to the potentially 10's of billions for UK Companies when/if they get the full benefit of the oil.  From what I read, it has been known for some time that oil existed there. 

3/ Argentina's attempt to close ports to UK shipping is more of a propaganda news item than reality.... Supply ships and military ones visit S.American ports..

http://panampost.com/panam-staff/2014/12/08/uk-ship-in-chile-revives-falklands-controversy-with-argentina/

and Argentina has 'fits' ...

I had mentioned FALKLANDS Flagged ships not being accepted to dock....UK ships perhaps there is less unification on that issue, as the UK still has some residue clout. 

Fathertime, I invite you to check out the 'validity' of Argentina's 'claim' - you are posting 'silly'.. Argentina's 'claim' is laughably tenuous.

Actually it is the UK's claim that is laughably tenuous....expelling the original South American settlers, and colonizing an island nearly 8000 miles away, just because they 'saw it' isn't much of a claim....but their military has been strong enough to keep it.. If indeed they reap the oil resources and their nearby nations receive no benefit, we shall see if repercussions ensue. 

ANY chance of a negotiation for 'joint sovereignty' disapated - for generations -  with the invasion of '82

The 1982 invasion came about because the military Junta were deeply unpopular and  needed a diversion - The UK had 'pulled' the last ship patrolling the region and Argentina thought this meant the UK wouldn't defend dependents

I beleive Pres. Putin would have had the Falklands Factor in his mind when arranging the 'return' of Crimea - as Thatcher went from likely to be removed - deep economic woes - to national hero...

Was there ANY indication that the UK was going to permit joint sovereignty with Argentina?  I didn't read anything insinuating that was even on the table for the UK prior to 1982.


When Putin pointed this out recently, it merely demonstrated that many Western nations have very little room to speak about how sinful Russian acquisitions are.  It probably plays well in defeated nations that continue to be  subjugated to the ill effects (like competitive disadvantage or loss of resources) as a result of the colonization of yesteryear. 


Fathertime!   

[msmobyone]

Hola Msmobyone!


The 'costs' of the colonization of the Falklands won't be large compared to the potentially 10's of billions for UK Companies when/if they get the full benefit of the oil.  From what I read, it has been known for some time that oil existed there. 

I say, Good Morning, Fathertime.. you don't hear much Spanish spoken on the islands  - save for a period of temporary occupation in 1982 and Spanish control ...

I suggest you may be reading highly dubious sources of 'info' ... France, Spain, UK and Argentina have all claimed the islands, but one nation has consistently claimed and even removed usurpers - long before Argentina's creation.

I had mentioned FALKLANDS Flagged ships not being accepted to dock....UK ships perhaps there is less unification on that issue, as the UK still has some residue clout. 

Indeed you did. I was careless in this respect.

Actually it is the UK's claim that is laughably tenuous....expelling the original South American settlers, and colonizing an island nearly 8000 miles away, just because they 'saw it' isn't much of a claim....but their military has been strong enough to keep it.. If indeed they reap the oil resources and their nearby nations receive no benefit, we shall see if repercussions ensue. 

Oh dear, now you are being careless.
 
1/ as prevously pointed out - The Islands have cost FAR more than revenues received and many previous oil / gas explorations have resulted in a lot of costs with no return. Companies like Noble are 'risk takers'  - paying for the rights to search in the eastern med... where Turkey 'insists' that Cypriot waters are her responsibility via the internationally unrecognised 'Turish Rep of Northern Cyprus'

2/ IF it transpires that the region is rich in reserves and can be profitably tapped - Argentina has NO say in the matter and has only her previous leaders to blame - as the Brits might have agreed to joint sovereignty - prior to the invasion of 1982.

Was there ANY indication that the UK was going to permit joint sovereignty with Argentina?  I didn't read anything insinuating that was even on the table for the UK prior to 1982.

GLAD you asked 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/falklandislands/9141841/Falkland-Islands-was-nearly-shared-by-Britain-and-Argentina.html

When Putin pointed this out recently, it merely demonstrated that many Western nations have very little room to speak about how sinful Russian acquisitions are.  It probably plays well in defeated nations that continue to be  subjugated to the ill effects (like competitive disadvantage or loss of resources) as a result of the colonization of yesteryear. 


Fathertime!

it is noted that you seem to support Russia's TWICE - aanexation of Crimea - twice breaking treaties which promised her integrity - to the Ottoman Empire and subsequently, Ukraine - yet fail to note the irony in the Kremlin's double standards ...

[fathertime]

I say, Good Morning, Fathertime.. you don't hear much Spanish spoken on the islands  - save for a period of temporary occupation in 1982 and Spanish control ...

I suggest you may be reading highly dubious sources of 'info' ... France, Spain, UK and Argentina have all claimed the islands, but one nation has consistently claimed and even removed usurpers - long before Argentina's creation.

Buenos dias Msmobyone!


Argentina was created around the same time all the other land masses were created...people lived there 1000's of years ago....it was conquered and colonized like many other areas by European nations.  Peoples from the region populated the falklands before the UK, it was the UK's military might that has secured the islands, not some divine right above anybody elses...they ejected the inhabitants and claimed it as theirs.  There is nothing 'right' about that...Argentina has a rightful claim to the area but not the ability to enforce it. 

 


Oh dear, now you are being careless.
 
1/ as prevously pointed out - The Islands have cost FAR more than revenues received and many previous oil / gas explorations have resulted in a lot of costs with no return. Companies like Noble are 'risk takers'  - paying for the rights to search in the eastern med... where Turkey 'insists' that Cypriot waters are her responsibility via the internationally unrecognised 'Turish Rep of Northern Cyprus'

2/ IF it transpires that the region is rich in reserves and can be profitably tapped - Argentina has NO say in the matter and has only her previous leaders to blame - as the Brits might have agreed to joint sovereignty - prior to the invasion of 1982.

I don't see the carelessness in pointing out the weakness in the United Kingdom's claim.  Thanks for the article regarding the negotiations in the 1970's....as can be seen it was fruitless for the Argentine's and likely wasn't going to change, so they took action in their own hands and made the UK fight...when the time is right they may do it again.  I doubt the Argentinians believe the negotiations were in good faith, as it shouldn't be difficult to allow for joint sovereignty and dual citizenship.

it is noted that you seem to support Russia's TWICE - aanexation of Crimea - twice breaking treaties which promised her integrity - to the Ottoman Empire and subsequently, Ukraine - yet fail to note the irony in the Kremlin's double standards ...

It is very obvious that Russia has double standards...what many here refuse to recognize is that the Western nations also have double standards.  Imposing costs on land taken is something I can support...which is why I think sanctions are a reasonable way to go about this...in addition costs (although minimal) should continue to be imposed on the UK for the Falklands issue which has not be resolved in what many feel is an adequate way. 


Fathertime! 


 

[msmobyone]

Buenos dias Msmobyone!

Good day to you, Fathertime

Argentina was created around the same time all the other land masses were created...people lived there 1000's of years ago....it was conquered and colonized like many other areas by European nations.  Peoples from the region populated the falklands before the UK, it was the UK's military might that has secured the islands, not some divine right above anybody elses...they ejected the inhabitants and claimed it as theirs.  There is nothing 'right' about that...Argentina has a rightful claim to the area but not the ability to enforce it. 

Now, I know you are losing the plot..  the islands were mostly unihabited. FACT.. The UK's claim long predate's Argentina's existence as an entity.

I don't see the carelessness in pointing out the weakness in the United Kingdom's claim. 

So, you didn't read points 1/ and 2/ or ...

Thanks for the article regarding the negotiations in the 1970's....as can be seen it was fruitless for the Argentine's and likely wasn't going to change, so they took action in their own hands and made the UK fight...when the time is right they may do it again.  I doubt the Argentinians believe the negotiations were in good faith, as it shouldn't be difficult to allow for joint sovereignty and dual citizenship.

Your opinion re the right of self-determination of folk who have lived there for generations - before any possible value was associated with the islands - is 'noted' ... 

It is very obvious that Russia has double standards...what many here refuse to recognize is that the Western nations also have double standards.  Imposing costs on land taken is something I can support...which is why I think sanctions are a reasonable way to go about this...in addition costs (although minimal) should continue to be imposed on the UK for the Falklands issue which has not be resolved in what many feel is an adequate way. 


Fathertime! 


 

OK, based on your 'rationale' we should be sanctioning the USA, the traditional sea-faring nations -Spain, France, Portugal and the UK...Tibet for the Golden Horde..