Russia risks punishing itself

4
In conditions when the USA and the European Union continue to drag out the sanctions noose around Russia, the country faces a very difficult question: what can be opposed to such hostile attacks?





One of the measures in connection with Western sanctions was proposed by the Chairman of the State Duma of Russia Vyacheslav Volodin. It lies in the fact that companies operating on Russian territory and at the same time adhering to anti-Russian sanctions may be punished. For some businessmen who place overseas sanctions above Russian law, liability can be criminal.

In Russia, we must live according to Russian laws

- Volodin emphasized during a meeting with experts and representatives of business circles.

One of the specific examples of how exactly companies comply with Western anti-Russian sanctions is the refusal to work on the territory of the Crimean peninsula. This is exactly the same inalienable territory of Russia as, say, the Moscow Region or the Krasnodar Territory. But Crimean residents experience many problems due to the lack of many services available in other Russian regions. For example, in Crimea there is not a single representative office of Sberbank. Many retail chains refuse to work in Crimean settlements. There are difficulties associated with the provision of mobile services. Thus, due to fears of many firms to fall under sanctions, Crimea remains a “special territory”, even four years after reunification with Russia.

If Volodin’s initiative is implemented, the management of these companies will choose between two risks: fall under foreign restrictive measures or be in the dock.

In fact, there is every reason to accuse them of violating Russian laws. This is in the 90s of the last century in humiliated Yeltsin Russia, international law was put higher than national. However, on December 15, 2015, Russian President Vladimir Putin eliminated this sad legacy of the 90s. He signed a law according to which the Constitutional Court may invalidate decisions of international courts if they contradict the Constitution of the Russian Federation. That is, the priority of Russian law has been restored.

However, liability for following anti-Russian sanctions for business is currently not provided. This makes it possible for a number of Russian companies to discriminate against Crimeans.

The columnist of the newspaper “Vzglyad” Anton Krylov expressed the opinion that it is not worth supporting the initiative of Volodin. He noted that if companies operate in Crimea contrary to US and EU sanctions, they will lose foreign funding. In addition, they will not be able to place their shares on many foreign exchanges, as well as conduct any economic activity in the USA, countries of the European Union and some other states.

The question arises - what is more beneficial for state-owned companies and for the state as their owner: strict adherence to such a law or the ability to continue working in rich and promising Western markets?

–– the author of the article writes.

He added that the same question arises for foreign investors. An example was given by the Siemens company. Despite the fact that its turbines were in the Crimea, the company constantly expresses concern about Russian actions. Therefore, she does not face any restrictions. If the law proposed by Volodin is adopted, then Siemens (and other organizations) will be forced to make a choice: either supply their products without any restrictions, or completely cease their activities in Russia.

In an article on the Vzglyad website, the author warns the Russian authorities against a “shot in his own leg”. The main conclusion that he makes: the initiative of the head of the State Duma needs to be carefully worked out. It is necessary to study all the consequences for the country's economy. Perhaps such a law can be adopted, but exceptions to the rules are needed. Or there should be no exceptions, but those who refuse, for example, to work in Crimea, must pay a fine that will go towards the development of Crimean cities.

The most important thing is to carefully calculate the consequences of each, both tactical and strategic, and only after that make legally binding decisions

- summed up the expert.

It remains to add: in his reasoning there is common sense. Indeed, the issue of reaction to foreign sanctions is very important. In no case can the foreign policy be changed under Western pressure. In this case, getting rid of the economic consequences of sanctions, you can lose a lot in political sphere. Leaving the anti-Russian steps unanswered is also not an option. Then impunity will further untie the hands of opponents. The answer is necessary, only it must be such that it would cause more damage to Western "stranglers" than to its own citizens.
4 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 0
    April 22 2018 07: 13
    Funny, really, they themselves answered their question: "where is it more profitable?" At first, they raised loan rates, made the population poorer than the Chinese with beggarly salaries, business inspections, "corruption control" survived offshore, the rules of doing business are changed twice a week, the country was driven under sanctions, and then they are tormented by the question: "where is the money for companies ( it is "money", and not "no one and nowhere needed" ruble) to earn more profitable, The answer is simple: it is more profitable where they pay with "real" money and where you can be on the "world market" all the time one-time contracts, not knowing what will happen tomorrow, are more profitable where the "game" goes according to understandable rules, and not through the pocket of a thieving official who has an appetite like a shark and "seven Fridays a week" ..... and all this not in Russia.
  2. 0
    April 22 2018 09: 04
    Quote: Monster_Fat
    Funny, really ...

    All the time, prosralipolymers.)))
    Another wave of exacerbation?)))
  3. 0
    April 22 2018 10: 35
    "The Constitutional Court may invalidate decisions of international courts" - i.e. Russia does not recognize international law, i.e. laws that the whole world recognizes! Well, who will cooperate with Russia after that? De facto, Russia is isolated and has no allies, it even got to the point that the members of the invented, collective defense spat on an agreement with Russia - Kazakhstan did not support Russia on the Syrian issue, "Father" communicates more with Europe. And for large Russian enterprises, working with the Crimea, DPR-LPR, despite the sanctions, is tantamount to death.
    Conclusion: the article is another chatter about anything.
  4. +1
    April 22 2018 12: 00
    Quote: master2
    .... Russia does not recognize international law, i.e. laws that the whole world recognizes! Well, who after this will cooperate with Russia. De facto, Russia is in isolation ...

    We have long heard tales about a "civilized society" that supposedly has the right to teach the whole world about democracy and laws. Better tell us about the legality of the missile strike on Syria! And Iraq and Libya were also destroyed on legal or democratic grounds? That Russia has the right not to recognize the decisions of foreigners in relation to itself - speaks of its sovereignty! And your "whole world" or "collective West" from America and sixes / G7 / is hysterical from impotence that they cannot impose their will on Russia by military force)))
    And isolate Russia-not enough tape)))

    All your attempts to humiliate Russia are

    Quote: master2
    ... this is another chatter about nothing.