Russia's top bank quits Europe due to sanctions

Eg. Their technological advancement will be crippled for decades to come, because they will still want to maintain their existing fleet.

Even now, Russia sells their tech advancement in military tech to others ( eg. India) and doesn't use it much for themselves because of cost. Even while they are investing 6% of their GDP into military.

That 6% in military that they invest now, will become much less in absolute value in the future. So it will be easier to outcompete them with a 1% investment of richer economies and concentrate on things besides military.

Just my 2 cents.

Literally everyone in the world is hoping the sanctions work. If it does, it tells the world even a nuclear power can't attack sovereign nations and get away with it. If it doesn't... then humanity is not post-war and we're about to get into a nuclear world war.

>Russia has invaded Ukraine and Europe has responded in a unified manor. China gave muted support, but largely stayed out of it (at least vocally - but still traded with them).

No they didn't. China picked up the phone with Putin on day 1 and said peace talks immediately and made comment they respect Ukraines sovereignty as well as the security needs for all involved. China appears to have been sideswipped and used as as shield by putin.

>China is, of course, watching very closely, as they have their own expansionist interests.

This is seeming more and more like Russian propaganda. China has 75 years of foreign policy showing no expansion. They have all the factories and a gigantic standing army. They could expand and take quite alot. Yet they dont because they know war isn't the way. Invest the war money back in yourself and grow taller.

>How does/can Russia get out of this and save face?

Every good negotiator makes it possible for their opponent to save face. Russia has a huge and simple one they provided themselves. "Nazi government was toppled, we are guaranteeing the new republics. White Peace out." Though to get sanctions lifted im sure there will be reparations to be paid.

>Where will this go with social/cyber warfare - it has to ramp-up dramatically, no? Now that western Europe has increased its military spending, what does that mean for the "World Police" American stance that has been so prevalent since the late 40's?

Everyone is making this about the USA... the Russian propaganda was running all these 'USA imperialism' which hey... they have to get in line... the commonwealth is up first... but the USA didn't do anything. Didnt get involved other than showing unity with the EU. Russia probably predicted the USA would act. In fact, it looks like an awful lot of effort is being done to curb the ongoing russian propaganda internally for most countries.

> Does this, in fact push forward clean technology, or will it hinder it as now America and Canada sit in a prime spot to export fuel and make record profits for decades - environment be damned?

Usa and Canada are leading the way with clean tech in many ways. We have 10,000 trees per person. Canadian solar is top notch. Our automotive industry has pivoted in an instant to manufacturing EVs. Coal plants are gone or going? The only thing I think Canada is missing out on is nuclear fusion.

The world needs oil still. Oil rich countries are switching over. Lets not exclude awesome scandanavian countries. This hasn't been some sort of Canadian conspiracy to convince Russia to attack a sovereign neighbour. This is Canada being a good ally and offering conflict-free oil.

Personally, I think every country is looking at how much it relies on other countries to get by. Europe is too reliant on Russia for gas, and most of the world is too reliant on China for pretty much everything except food. I don't see this lasting another 10 years.

Any alternative system would likely be based in China and that would mean that currencies would be backed by China's debt. China would need to take on debt levels that would leave China in an impossible situation. It would mean crushing levels of taxation that would drain China's wealth to the benefit of nations like Russia. There would be a major imbalance in payments. Russia and other nations would make net gains and China would have net losses. Even seizing assets in these nations China would need to sell the assets internationally using the same US/UK/EU system that provides the liquidity and access to markets.

It would require China to become even more reliant on business with Western nations to fund this system making the whole thing illogical and circular in structure. If the Western nations pulled out of Chinese manufacturing it would mean the US/UK/EU could collapse the whole parallel system over time and make it insolvent.

If SWIFT "is neutral" and sanction aren't applied, the sanctions are applied zero times.

Once is better than zero.

It's frankly the closest thing to a nuclear scenario you could get - in fact it's worse from the perspective that you enemies continue to live on while you wither. "At least" in a nuclear scenario both sides die.

Global systems don't need everyone to participate; they just need the key players to participate. It's really a special club, and if you're not allowed in the club then you'll probably never be able to climb to that level from outside.

Being global is far more important than being neutral, and countries will gladly sacrifice the latter if that is the cost to get the former.

Any meaningful global payments system requires access to the U.S. as European financial markets, either because of direct dealing with banks situated in these countries, or because of indirect dealings (virtually any other bank needs to deal with major U.S. or European banks eventually, and one can impose restrictions on the latter).

As a simple example: U.S. regulators can easily force the hands of major European banks, because every one of those banks needs access to the U.S. financial market, if only so their clients can deal there.

Want to buy Apple, Google, or Microsoft stock? Then neutrality is not an option.

The problem with your type of thinking is that it can lead someone to sit on its tools until they're rusty and useless, out of fear of "using them up."

It's probably an inevitability that these "global payment systems" stop being global, because globalization never brought the political unity it promised. Countries will inevitably recognize the vulnerabilities created by dependence on rival's systems, and if they're big enough, they'll eventually build alternatives to solve that.

Honestly, I think the main problem with sanctions is they let political leaders delude themselves into thinking they're doing something to solve a problem, when they really aren't. Sanctions aren't going to get Putin to leave Ukraine: that's an immediate military problem that requires an immediate military solution. There's a small chance they'll destabilize the Russian regime over the long term, but I think the more likely outcome is they'll push Russia deeper into Chinese orbit, solidifying an alliance of rivals. Just look what happened to Belarus very recently.

If you think Russia, China and Belarus are going to be neutral, then you are being a bit naive. The West may not be neutral but it is rules based, so you know what you are getting before you start working with it. Russia, China and Belarus are not rules based and they will retaliate against you for a whole list of things that are not written down anywhere.

I think that most countries on the periphery of “polite society” as you put it - are not there by choice and would like to join the club and enjoy the benefits (example Ukraine) as soon as possible.

And the global actors of disorder and chaos do whatever it is they do with predictable consequences to their own prosperity.

If I punch you in the nose, I don’t care what institution you represent. You won’t remain “neutral” for long.

If the answer is "no", they have nothing to worry about. Russia has already shown that anything less than this results in little more than a slap on the wrist.

If the answer is "yes", or even "maybe", then yeah, they're going to have to stay out of international institutions. As it should be.

Right, but then situations emerge when it is no longer possible to be neutral.

[1] - https://youtu.be/AyEORjgaaNc

The truth is that the global economy is simply too interconnected for a single country (or even group of countries) to break away and do their own thing. Trade is good. Unprovoked wars are bad. This is something literally the entire planet agrees on.

I guess the farms aren’t in cities but is it realistic that Ukraine will be in any shape to export much wheat this year at this point.

"China leapfrogged Russia to become Ukraine's biggest single trading partner in 2019, with overall trade totalling $18.98 billion last year, a nearly 80% jump from 2013, according to data from the State Statistics Service of Ukraine. [...] China became the largest importer of Ukrainian barley in the 2020-21 marketing year. About 30% of China's corn imports last year, more than 8 million tonnes, came from Ukraine, Chinese customs data showed."

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/chinas...

If the war starts impacting the price of staples in China, that's going to strain Russia's relations with its only significant remaining ally.

We all know dirty money go there eventually

Given time though, not sure. Especially China / India.

It's like if I get suckerpunched by someone on a subway, because his great-granddaddy was once mugged on the subway 60 years ago. It explains it, but it doesn't excuse it.

> For one, the Ukraine invasion is the US's fault

i don't see it being anyone's fault put Putin's

> we can manipulate and control the status quo (i.e. win a "war") without firing a shot or dropping a bomb

i don't see the war being won or at least not in the literal sense. The Ukrainian people have put up stiff resistance but all the articles i've read from military experts all end with the same sobering realization, the Russian army is just too big and too equipped to be defeated by Ukraine.

> I think the West's goal here is to deliver the final blow to Putin and topple his regime, even if it requires killing innocent people along the way.

I hope not, because an existential threat to Putin and his regime is, well, an existential threat and will be dealt with in an existential way. You can read between the lines.

This is transparently false, on its face. Russia invaded Ukraine unprovoked. They're bombing Kiev and other major cities and civilian areas indiscriminately with cluster munitions.

Putin is trying to recreate a Russian empire. Russia's claims of needing to defend itself are just the lies that they feed the public to manufacture consent.

But I want to hear a good reason why Russia should have the right to object. I am so happy that my country Romania managed to enter in NATO just to be safe from the Russia threat but unfortunately our brothers in Moldova are still in danger.

That is an insane take. lol

Putin's government legalize spousal abuse.[1] It's hard to get more evil than that. Any government that managed to achieve a degree of stability could have had as much success as Putin's, he doesn't deserve special credit for Russia's relative success. Nevermind that many Russians still live in poverty and corruption and crime are still endemic so it's not like he's actually solved the problem. Putin's success has been mostly a propaganda victory where instead of of a strong economy and the rule of law, he's promised Russians a sense of recovered strength and importance on the world stage. That's not to be commended but many Westerners seem to have fallen for Putin's nonsense hook, line, and sinker.

"Some of Putin's invasions occurred because we, the West/NATO, offered membership to those countries, when Russia made it clear that was a big no-no "

Russia apologists always suggest that Putin has to be a belligerent because his neighbours are joining NATO, but they never seem to ask whether Putin's neighbours have to join NATO because of Putin's belligerence. It seems rich to me so suggest that countries such as Latvia and Estonia should have to remain in Russia's orbit just because Russia feels threatened. Like leaving a battered spouse in the hands of an abuser so that he doesn't feel like his patrimony is threatened. Even in the worst case scenario in which a hostile NATO is on Russia's doorstep what is Putin afraid of? That NATO will invade? This is ridiculous. This is about empire.

"Note, the US would react just the same. We have the Monroe Doctrine and the Cuban Missile Crisis to show for it. "

The US did not invade Cuba during the Cuban missile crisis and the Monroe doctrine opposed European colonialism and did not prohibit Latin American countries from voluntarily entering agreements with European powers.

[1] https://cepa.org/russias-domestic-violence-epidemic/

No, it is not. Putin is responsible for what is happening right now. Putin and his enablers. Nobody forced Putin to invade. It was pretty clear that invading was actually a bad move (compared to the alternative of not invading), so it was a largely emotional decision on Putin's part. Or it was a very calculating one, but one made in a bubble of unreality and disconnection due to his unique position as a hated tyrant.