Category Archives: foreign policy

Sanctions and Competition

Posted on by
1

Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, and Czech Republic have directly appealed to our Congressional leadership to expedite turning on the export spigot for our natural gas.  These four nations see the directness and immediacy of the advantage of buying natural gas from us rather than from the Russians.

There’s another effect, though, from our increasing our gas, and oil, exports as quickly and as far as we can.  That’s the effect on oil and gas pricing in the global markets.  Such a large and easy increase in supply will depress those prices, which will have a competition-based double whammy on Russia: it will deprive Russia of billions of dollars in income from its own oil and gas exports by lowering the price, sharply, that Russia can demand, through depriving Russia of its energy monopoly.  Keep in mind, also, that the Russian economy almost exclusively is built on oil and gas exports—it has nothing else other than cheap, second tier military equipment, and while that remains a strong Russian industry, it’s not strong enough to carry the Russian economy, much less provide the funding necessary for Russian…adventurism.

The other whammy also is in those sharply lower oil and gas prices.  That decrease will make it easier for erstwhile Russian “clients,” including Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Ukraine, the EU (Germany, France, and Great Britain especially) to get their energy from somewhere more reliable than Russia, and at a cheaper price.

That cheaper price for these others produces a separate whammy for them: cheaper energy can be only to the good for their economies as they struggle to break out of the doldrums remaining from the global Panic of 2008.

But that’s what competition does—it lowers prices and sets economies free to generate prosperity.  An attempt to boycott Russian oil and gas is unnecessary.

Crimea and Sanctions on Russia

Posted on by
1

Promptly opening the export spigot on our own oil and gas production and accelerating our development of those fields, including on Federal land (which will have minimal production effect today; although it’ll have significant effect in the near- to mid-term by significantly expanding the supply of oil and gas on the global market) will produce an immediate spike down in the global price of oil and gas, which will have an associated immediate negative impact on the value of Russian oil and gas exports.

Blocking Russian access to credit on the global banking system—even just on the American banking system—and requiring cash-only transactions will have a negative impact on Russia’s cash reserves.

Seizing the personal banking and physical assets held by the Russian oligarchs and by Putin will remove billions of dollars’ worth of value from these folks—and it’s the oligarchs as much as a mendacious Russian legislature who are the source of Putin’s political power.

Of course, a significant fraction of the success of the sanctions will depend on how well Europe does its part.  Their participation will go a long way toward identifying who truly believes in the sanctity—as opposed to the convenience—of national sovereignty and who just engages in empty rhetoric for personal gain.  Their participation will go a long way toward identifying who our friends are and who are just summertime soldiers.  Their participation will go a long way toward determining who stands with Ukraine and who are willing only to talk about standing with Ukraine.

We can’t let their timidity stand in the way of our acting, though.  Nor can we let the fact that the sanctions will bring Russian retaliatory sanctions on us deter us.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Friday sanctions imposed by the West “would inevitably hit the United States like a boomerang.”  Their foreign ministry added they “will not accept the language of sanctions and threats,” and will respond if sanctions are imposed.

What sanctions can Russia impose?  They can block further Western/American investment in Russian oil and gas field development.  They can block further Western/American investment in oil and gas delivery systems (read: pipelines).  They can cease existing Western/American investments throughout their economy, not only in their oil and gas industry.  They can begin dumping their holding of American Treasuries.  They even could deny us access via their territory and airspace to our bases in the ‘Stans from which we support our war effort in Afghanistan.

This will hurt us, to be sure.  But who else will it hurt?  Russia can’t develop its oil and gas industry without us—that’s why we’re there.  What they have developed has been being depleted for more than 10 years; those assets are declining in value.  Their economy is utterly dependent on oil and gas.  Recall the damage done Texas’ strictly oil and gas economy during the first Arab oil embargo and the Nixon price controls.

Dumping their US Treasury holding will devalue the rest of what they hold, decreasing their ability to convert the rest into cash with which to complete the now-demanded cash only transaction.

Our war in Afghanistan is winding down, and those bases already are becoming less and less critical to our efforts.

The oligarchs’ loss of their own overseas assets and their loss of access to non-Russian banking, even to their overseas villas and other assets will hurt Putin’s primary supporters where it hurts the most: in their own pocketbooks.

The sanctions that will boomerang on us will boomerang right back on them, and worse.

And our own actions will determine whether our own administration truly believes in the sanctity of national sovereignty, with whom we are friends, whether we stand with Ukraine.  I’ve no doubt where the American people stand.

Administration…Foot-Dragging

Posted on by
Reply

Russian energy exports.  Ukraine, for instance, gets some 40%-50% of its natural gas from Russia, and Europe gets roughly 30% its natural gas from Russia.  Recall, just a few short years ago, too, the Russian extortion of cutting off those gas flows—in the middle of winter—over an alleged bill-paying (or not) scandal: it wasn’t those who supposedly weren’t paying the country’s gas bill who were harmed, though, it was the citizenry threatened with freezing temperatures in their own homes.  And as part of the Russian extortion, they cut off gas flows to Europe, too.

Now comes the Obama administration, with its control over our own ability to export natural gas to various places—for instance, to Europe and to Ukraine—or to the world generally.  The one export targets would directly break Russia’s hold over Ukraine and Europe, while the other would, at the least, drive down the price of natural gas, making it easier for those two to find and import other sources.  Yet this is the claim of Bill Gibbons, spokesman for President Barack Obama’s Energy Department:

Regarding specific Energy Department actions on LNG exports, the Department remains committed to an expeditious and responsible process.  We continue to make public interest determinations on a case-by-case basis, carefully considering economic, energy security, environmental and geopolitical impacts, among other factors.

Surely, breaking Ukraine’s and Europe’s dependence on Russian energy sources is a matter of geopolitical impact, especially with Russia having invaded Ukraine.  Yet the Energy Secretary, who under DoE’s permitting process can deny applications to countries that don’t have a free trade agreement with us, has approved all of six applications in the last three plus years to such countries, and he has some 24 more applications sitting on his desk with no action in the offing.  Certainly, all of those predate the present Russian assault, but acting on those export applications, rather than dissembling about them, would have an immediate favorable impact on Ukraine and Europe, if only through natural gas pricing on the world market—which would help these while harming Russia.

This administration automatically foot drags, even in an on-going crisis, on any matter pertaining to international affairs.  It has no understanding of foreign affairs, and so it’s wholly incapable of anticipating and planning for global events; this lack underlies its foot-dragging.

It’s no wonder our enemies have such contempt for us—and Ukraine is in the strait it’s in.

US “Policy to Counter Putin Still Evolving”

Posted on by
Reply

President Barack Obama has threatened to consult with allies to see about beginning to think of what might be done vis-à-vis the Russian attack on Ukraine.  He even spent 90 minutes over the weekend on the phone with Russian President Vladimir Putin being chastised by Putin for his effrontery in demurring from that invasion.

Secretary of State John Kerry has decried Putin’s “unopposed entry” into Ukraine as a 19th century move in the 21st century—as though that means that Russia’s invasion hasn’t actually occurred.  On Tuesday, he was enroute to Kiev while, as the Fox News headline put it, our “policy to counter Putin still is evolving.”

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel hasn’t said anything at all.  That may be the wisest move of the three: remaining silent and being thought a fool, rather than speaking and removing all doubt.  Even if he is silent only because he doesn’t make policy.

How is it, after this administration’s five years in power, the last 14 months with the current crowd, that we’re only now getting around to start to begin developing some sort of policy to deal with Russian behavior?

Could it be because the grade school amateurism of a community organizer, a motor boat skipper, and a guy who won’t be making defense policy is unequal to the task of facing the world?

In the meantime, keep an eye on the Senkaku, Spratly and Paracel Islands.

The People are not Sovereign

Posted on by
Reply

…government is.  Or so says Czar of all the Russias President Vladimir Putin.

Of course people wanted change.  But [people] cannot impose illegal change…you need to use only constitutional means.

Never mind that the will of the people is what gives “constitutional means” legitimacy, since those means are the will of the people given concrete effect.  But not in Putin’s world.  In his world view, “constitutional means” are what government says they are, and government is constituted the way the men populating the organs of government say it is.  No people, no citizens, are involved.

Putin also insisted that [Interim President] Oleksandr Turchynov was

not legitimate.  From the legal perspective it is Mr. Yanukovych who is president.

No.  Plainly no.  From the legal perspective, Yanukovich had lost all legitimacy the moment he lost the consent of the Ukrainian people to be their President.  That he had lost that consent is amply demonstrated by all those months in the streets—and not only in Kiev—by the people protesting, at first his actions, and ultimately his political status.  The firmness of their will is corroborated by the violence against and the murders of the protestors sanctioned by that government, and the people’s continued protests despite those atrocities.

Putin also has announced that he has no obligation to respect the wishes of the Ukrainian people as expressed in the upcoming May governmental elections, if he doesn’t get the results he wants.

Never mind that exactly those elections are what will express the will of the people, if the elections are allowed to go forward freely and fairly.  The only interference there will be “such terror as we see now” in the form of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.  The only “terror as [Putin] see[s] now” is his own terror of the will of the people—perhaps of the will of the Russian people, as well.

Finally, this:

Putin said Tuesday that Moscow reserved the right to protect ethnic Russians in Ukraine by any means necessary….

This was Hitler’s excuse for Sudetenland.  However, the “ethnic Russians” are Ukrainian citizens, not Russian citizens, and it is the responsibility of the Ukrainian government to protect its citizens.  If Putin is claiming a right (oddly, not a duty) to protect the badly abused citizens of another sovereign nation, than we have to ask: where is his duty in Syria, in northern Korea?  Oh, wait….