(I will note that most western oil comes from the middle east with Europe also getting a decent amount from Russia.)
In the Cold War, dealing with Soviets was unthinkable. Now, the West is complacent, there is even a term for it, Schröderizatsiya. See this opinion piece by the former Estonian president [1].
[1] https://news.err.ee/1608362130/toomas-hendrik-ilves-alexei-n...
So does the Russian elite as you say, even Putin himself. The US's currency is the reserve currency of the world and the currency most commerce is done in so western banks are used. They also are much more stable than banks in their own countries where other elites could steal their money. This doesn't mean that the US or the west is somehow controlling their countries.
The goal with these sorts of comments is to try and get liberal democracies to stop engaging in the rest of the world. If you keep getting told it’s your fault eventually you say “fine I’m done” and then that’s when they win.
Yes, in the sense that Aleksander Dugins foundations of geopolitics exists and is taught in military schools in Russia. It proposes - among other tactics, exactly this approach. Splitting hairs, gaslighting and exhaustion.
It's worth noting that this special book was published during the reign of Yeltsin, a Clinton puppet installed and protected by various Western agencies. That could be a reason there is some consideration of similar actions in the opposite direction.
What about China, should they be sanctioned too?
[Many make the claim that sanctions mostly affect civilians so for example are against Iran Sanctions, etc.]
Although really the question of banking money from unacceptable foreigners is an old one, unresolved throughout the 20th century. It's too convenient for the West to really give up on, so a short list is maintained of the "definitely unacceptable", but there's no systematic criteria for what "unacceptable" really is.
It's quite clear from the lack of UK response to the Salisbury poisonings that the UK is financially compromised into indifference, for example.
Besides sanctions, we should also seek to undermine and delegitimize those governments by supporting dissident movements and other covert actions.
https://www.icij.org/investigations/panama-papers/new-icij-i...
https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-international-anti-money-lau...
Enforcement of course is a perpetual cat-and-mouse game in which the cats are underfunded and the mice have money to burn.
I don't understand what point you tried to make. Do you believe someone needs deep state contacts and government approval to purchase private property in a European country?
They don't have to, benefiting just the right people is enough. Schröder & friends say hi.
Same was happening in Russia in 90s: western corporation took control of all Russia's natural resources using phony agreements and corrupt businessmen (like Mikhail Khodorkovsky). E.g. in 90s people in Russia were dying of hunger, but oil was sold to the West by the price of water.
When Putin came to power, first thing he had done is returning control over natural resources. That's exactly the moment when all the West started vilifying him so badly.
Not only SA sells oil to US, but it also invests earned money into US government bonds. It's allows them to do whatever they want in their country, no matter how "undemocratic" it is. And the "free" press being oh-so-independent and honest, happily ignores that too, instead always pointing you to more convenient targets.