“Sanctions”

European Union leaders are likely to approve a modest escalation in sanctions against Russia when they meet on Thursday to debate a response to the Kremlin’s annexation of Crimea…add new names to the list of 13 Russians and 8 Russia-allied Crimean leaders who the EU subjected to an asset freeze and travel ban on Monday….

What’s the matter with sanctions on Russia, the nation, too?  Things like freezing Russia out of the international banking system, withdrawing European support for the development of Russian oil and gas fields, stopping the transfer of associated technologies moving to get oil and gas—and coal—for Europe from sources other than Russia?  Moves to supply Ukraine with non-Russian energy?  Certainly such moves would sting Europe, as well, but Russia’s economy is no larger than Italy’s, and unlike Italy—and the rest of the EU—Russia has no economy outside its oil and gas exports.

Unfortunately, US’ “sanctions” are just as weak, and the Obama administration is just as timid in the face of Russian aggression.

Putin has, in fact, responded with sanctions of his own: he’s barring nine American government officials, including Speaker John Boehner (R, OH) and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D, NV) from entering Russia.  This is an obvious, contemptuous parody of Obama.

Surrender, Again

Here’s Great Britain’s Prime Minister, David Cameron, on the EU’s “response” to the Russian invasion and partition of Ukraine:

It’s important to send a very clear message that if there is further destabilization in Ukraine then there should be further wide ranging measures taken, and we’ve agreed tonight that we will task the European Commission to draw up those possible measures.

That’s it?  What about holding out for Russian withdrawal from Ukraine, Mr Prime Minister?

This is abject surrender.  It’s an insult to the courageous and strong British Prime Ministers of the past—Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher come to mind.  You, Mr Cameron, are unworthy of your nation.

Rookie Gaffe?

That’s what Paul Edelstein of IHS Global Insight thinks, according to The Wall Street Journal.  In the Fed’s post-FOMC presser last Wednesday, Fed President Janet Yellen suggested that interest-rate increases might start beginning roughly six months after the Fed’s QEx (which is in the process of being…tapered) ends or as soon as this fall.  Edelstein had this to say as the stock market reacted negatively to Yellen’s remarks:

This could have been a rookie gaffe on Yellen’s part.  This was, after all, her first press conference.

Or, it’s possible that Yellen knew what she was doing, and she said what she said with carefully chosen words.

It’s also possible that Yellen knew another thing that Edelstein and his ilk seem to have conveniently forgotten: the Fed exists to stabilize the economy’s price behavior and to work toward full employment, however that’s defined.  In particular, the Fed does not at all exist to prop up stock prices for the benefit of investors like Edelstein, or me.  Our performance—work with me on this, it seems to be a lost concept for many—is on us; it’s a part of our personal responsibility.

And we had to know that QEx would end, we do know that is ending, and we should know that it’s on us to deal with the inflation that will result on OEx’s completion.  The Fed has no obligation—it cannot have this obligation in a free market economy—to inure us from the outcomes of our decisions.

Knowledge of Obamacare

Seventy percent of uninsured Americans said they do not know about Obamacare tax credits, and 45% are unaware of the enrollment deadline.  So says a poll taken by Bankrate.com.

What might this mean, really, especially in the face of a Democratic Party that’s already demonstrated an impressive skill at getting its message out to all Americans?  Some thoughts come to mind.

  • We aren’t as plugged in to the Internet as we like to think we are.  While that might be true for rural America, the number of rural Americans cannot account for these numbers.
  • Nobody reads the newspapers or watches network news on television anymore.  Declining circulation and Nielson ratings do tend to support this.
  • It might also be strongly influenced by what we actually do when we’re online or reading the papers or watching TV.  Folks no longer read the “news” or watch it on TV—they’re reading the funny pages and sports sections, and they’re watching entertainment programming on TV.  And they’re doing largely the same thing as they surf the Internet.  The “news” items, no longer being unbiased reporting of the day’s events, are being increasingly disregarded altogether.
  • And it might be a simple case of whatever the Democratic, or Republican, Party says is becoming increasingly disregarded: from the fatigue induced by the constant bombardment by both parties (but by the Democrats especially) with political pronouncement, and duns for money which add to the general fatigue, as well as an irritation aspect.  And from a growing disdain for the routine and blatant mendacity of each party.

Surrender

Under threat of sanctions from the US and Europe, the Russians have finalized their annexation of Crimea.  One of the targets of the US’ “sanctions,” Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, expressed his feelings about them in a tweet:

Comrade Obama, what should those who have neither accounts nor property abroad do? Have you not thought about it?  I think the decree of the President of the United States was written by some joker.

The “sanctions?”  They

freeze any assets the targeted individuals have under US jurisdiction, make it illegal for Americans to do business with them and discourage international banks and financial institutions from having relationships with them, administration officials said.  The officials, however, would or could not say if those targeted actually have assets in US jurisdictions.

Hence the joke.  Does anybody believe, given the length of time this administration has been nattering on about freezing personal assets that there are any left that we can “freeze?”  Other than the amateurs in the White House, I mean.

Meanwhile, Europe has done even less.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said Tuesday that leaders of the Group of Eight world powers have suspended Russia’s participation in the club amid tensions over Ukraine and Russia’s incursion into Crimea.

Travel bans and the freezing of a few personal bank accounts—yeah.  That’ll show ’em.

And echoing John Kerry’s pleas to Putin not to take US actions personally; we really don’t mean to hurt your feelings, ” German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier bleats that sanctions must leave “ways and possibilities open to prevent a further escalation that could lead to the division of Europe.”

Also meanwhile, Ukrainian government officials met with US lawmakers pleading for military aid—not troops, but arms and ammunition.

“They wanted arms,” [one of the US] lawmaker[s] said, “even recognizing that it could be cited by Putin as an excuse, a provocation for further military action by him.  They said Putin’s goal has never been Crimea; his goal is Kiev.”

But this administration already has said, “No.”

For all of this abject surrender in the face of Russia’s naked aggression, though, President Barack Obama is happy to meet with terrorists, directly and personally.  He even insists that any “peace” agreement be based on Israel’s pre-1967, and so wholly indefensible, borders.

In the final meanwhile, watch Iran and their nuclear weapons program and the People’s Republic of China and their territorial grabs in the East and South China Seas.