An end run about the Freedom Caucus, Matt Gaetz, and Vladimir Putin. Having Russian global assets expropriated, 400 Billion USD of them for Ukraine
quote
Perhaps we just need to better explain the imperative of backing Ukraine. That Russia’s victory in Ukraine would put a?victorious?aggressor?slap-bang next to?NATO’s borders, give a green light for further Russian expansion,?
But also, it would risk the economic and social collapse of Ukraine, which would flood Europe with?multiple millions?of?additional?refugees from the conflict.?It would also be na?ve to think the disintegration of Ukraine would not result in arms leaking across the European Union’s (EU’s)?borders.?The?longer-term costs will be still larger.?The collective West would have failed.
But there is another way of doing this?— we can make Putin pay. Even the populists would struggle to argue with that.?The West holds $400bn of Russian assets, either frozen or immobilized?(for comparison, all Western aid so far, including financial, humanitarian, and military, totals?about $350bn .)
Western?governments?have presented us with?lame excuses?as to why?these cannot be used. These vary from the supposed risk to?the principle of?sovereign immunity , the risk of tit-for-tat appropriation of Western assets in Russia,?and?the dollar’s position as a reserve currency.
These are weak arguments.
The sovereign immunity argument has been debunked in a recent paper by the diplomat and academic Philip Zelikow and others, which shows that a state only has the right to sovereign immunity if it abides by international law. And Russia clearly is not.
Russia?has already?legislated ?to shakedown Western firms as they leave?and to give ?the “Russian state priority rights to buy any?Western asset for sale at a?‘significant discount’?so they could later be sold at a profit.”
The dollar’s position as a reserve currency would no longer be undermined by the move to seize Russian assets for use in Ukraine, as has already been by the freezing of these assets. Authoritarian regimes will have already got the message and will have moved assets accordingly
end of quote
Gaetz and Putin are laughing all the way now thinking that Putin will be able to conquer the EU, re occupy America and doing other things, while the rest of the world cowers with Putin global kingmaker
We need to flip the script and fast. This is a way to do it, and to neuter Gaetz and the freedom Caucus
We need to treat this as Manhattan project urgency material and get moving before Russia by default occupies the global heartland and forces all of us to kowtow to Vladimir Putin with the Freedom caucus strangling the American republic on Vladimir Putin's directions
quote
We Can Force Russia to Fund Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom
By Timothy Ash
October 6, 2023
There is another way of funding Ukraine's fight — we can make Putin pay.
The victory of Kremlin-friendly Robert?Fico?in Slovakia , strengthening?Europe’s?awkward?squad?on Ukraine, and then?Kevin?McCarthy’s?October 3?ousting ?as speaker of the US House of Representatives,?have?laid bare the vulnerability of the West’s current taxpayer-funded model for supporting Ukraine.?
While the necessity of supporting Ukraine, at all?costs, should be obvious to all?(it’s the best long-term investment the West can make in its own defense against an expansionist Russia),?it is a hard sell to electorates.?Why should we be spending hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars on Ukraine while there is a cost of living crisis at home?
领英推荐
Indeed, as the McCarthy and Fico experiences should tell us, plowing on with a taxpayer model of Ukraine funding risks an ever greater populist backlash at home, which?could do untold damage to liberal?market?democracy, which surely Ukraine’s fight is all about.?
Perhaps we just need to better explain the imperative of backing Ukraine. That Russia’s victory in Ukraine would put a?victorious?aggressor?slap-bang next to?NATO’s borders, give a green light for further Russian expansion,?and a similar signal to China over Taiwan.?
But also, it would risk the economic and social collapse of Ukraine, which would flood Europe with?multiple millions?of?additional?refugees from the conflict.?It would also be na?ve to think the disintegration of Ukraine would not result in arms leaking across the European Union’s (EU’s)?borders.?The?longer-term costs will be still larger.?The collective West would have failed.
But there is another way of doing this?— we can make Putin pay. Even the populists would struggle to argue with that.?The West holds $400bn of Russian assets, either frozen or immobilized?(for comparison, all Western aid so far, including financial, humanitarian, and military, totals?about $350bn .)
Western?governments?have presented us with?lame excuses?as to why?these cannot be used. These vary from the supposed risk to?the principle of?sovereign immunity , the risk of tit-for-tat appropriation of Western assets in Russia,?and?the dollar’s position as a reserve currency.
These are weak arguments.
The sovereign immunity argument has been debunked in a recent paper by the diplomat and academic Philip Zelikow and others, which shows that a state only has the right to sovereign immunity if it abides by international law. And Russia clearly is not.
Russia?has already?legislated ?to shakedown Western firms as they leave?and to give ?the “Russian state priority rights to buy any?Western asset for sale at a?‘significant discount’?so they could later be sold at a profit.”
The dollar’s position as a reserve currency would no longer be undermined by the move to seize Russian assets for use in Ukraine, as has already been by the freezing of these assets. Authoritarian regimes will have already got the message and will have moved assets accordingly.?
In other words, all three?horses have already bolted.?
There is another hard question that must be asked — should?Western national security interests?take a back seat to?Western businesses?that ultimately made?a disastrously?bad?call?by investing in Russia?
Of course, no one should discount the seriousness of these decisions, and?we must all?acknowledge the implications for issues including the?rule of law. But laws can and should be changed when national security is at stake.
If we fail?to?adequately and fairly finance?Ukraine, we risk not only?that country’s?defeat?but a political and populist backlash in our own?countries.?
This author pointed?out?last year that the United States is?currently?defeating a major strategic adversary — and close ally of China —?and?paying peanuts ?to do?so. If?the US, and its democratic allies, don’t have the moral strength for this fight, they at least have an obligation to consider the alternatives. That vast pile of assets sitting in Western bank vaults?is?an option that must be used.
Consider the alternative.?Imagine the lunacy?whereby?Western taxpayers?have committed multiple billions of their own money to aiding?Ukraine’s victory and reconstruction, only to?see?it lose and then?watch?their governments?handing?back the?money; turning over the?$400bn?to?a state characterized by kleptomania, mass murder, and imperial conquest.?
Does anyone imagine that the funds won’t be used to rebuild the military and threaten us again?
Maybe we should include a note in the envelope with the?check and a note?asking,?“What more can we do to help you Mr. Putin?”
Timothy Ash is a Senior Emerging Markets Sovereign Strategist at RBC BlueBay Asset Management. He is an Associate Fellow at Chatham House on their Russia and Eurasian program.?
The opinions in this article are those of the author.?
Europe’s Edge ?is CEPA’s online journal covering critical topics on the foreign policy docket across Europe and North America. All opinions are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the position or views?of the institutions they represent?or the Center for European Policy Analysis.
end of quote
Andrew Beckwith, PhD
Too busy with helping refugees to have a job now
1 年Indeed