Timeline for Why do EU sanctions against Russia stop short of a total trade ban?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
29 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 26, 2022 at 0:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPolitics/status/1497360766550396928 | ||
| Feb 25, 2022 at 16:12 | answer | added | bobflux | timeline score: 0 | |
| Feb 25, 2022 at 16:07 | comment | added | Andrew Corrigan | There's also a place for considering that too many sanctions has the potential to trigger all-out warfare; whereas the "slap on the wrist" type sanctions are good at putting the message out that we don't like what they're doing, while hopefully avoiding all out warfare | |
| Feb 25, 2022 at 9:17 | comment | added | Mast | @Mark Russia knows this, so they've been working with the Chinese on SPFS since 2014. About 20% of their banking traffic already uses this system instead of SWIFT and if I were the Russians I'd be in a hurry to ramp that up a bit. | |
| Feb 25, 2022 at 7:33 | comment | added | TooTea | @Mark Oh,is it? I don't know much about these things,but I assumed it was only going to make transactions with Russia cumbersome and tedious,not impossible. It feels like Russia only needs to set up its own alternative system and as long as trading isn't illegal there will always be banks willing to join it. Worst case,Russia can revert to however things used to be done before SWIFT, I guess couriers with suitcases full of gold? | |
| Feb 24, 2022 at 22:40 | comment | added | Mark | "Cutting Russia off from SWIFT" is not a "targeted surgical measure", it's the economic equivalent of a nuclear strike. | |
| Feb 24, 2022 at 19:09 | comment | added | TooTea | @TaW First because I live in the EU,so I want to understand the decisions of the politicians who I vote for. The second reason is hinted at in the first paragraph: I wouldn't be surprised if the US had little motivation to make any big sacrifices as they might not care all that much about Ukraine, while the EU is directly affected. | |
| Feb 24, 2022 at 18:46 | comment | added | TaW | Why do you ask about the EU and not about the US? | |
| Feb 24, 2022 at 15:32 | answer | added | Relaxed | timeline score: 3 | |
| Feb 24, 2022 at 9:45 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @Mast Let's wait and see how far the sanctions go. Maybe within one week there will be that total trade ban, no matter the costs. One week delay doesn't really matter if you plan for a long time. My guess is still that they wanted to give peace a chance, and maybe there was one. But now it seems that there will be war instead so no reason not to pull all plugs on sanctions. We will see. If sanctions continue to be small, it will be your explanation. | |
| Feb 24, 2022 at 7:09 | comment | added | Mast | Bans hurt, both sides. The EU screws their own citizens since all this talk about sanctions greatly increases the gas price. Natural gas is +/- 60% more expensive since May '21. | |
| Feb 23, 2022 at 21:33 | answer | added | fraxinus | timeline score: 4 | |
| Feb 23, 2022 at 17:00 | history | protected | Philipp♦ | ||
| Feb 23, 2022 at 14:57 | answer | added | w.k | timeline score: 2 | |
| Feb 23, 2022 at 12:02 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | The current amount of sanctions (two banks, three oligarchs) looks a bit like incrementalism to me. And there are quite some disadvantages to it, like people might not be interested so much if the sanctions next week is one bank and two oligarchs more. Attention to small steps might not be given. The sanctions are relatively mild so far, they really must deliberately be holding them back. | |
| Feb 23, 2022 at 5:08 | answer | added | Betterthan Kwora | timeline score: 2 | |
| S Feb 22, 2022 at 17:28 | history | became hot network question | |||
| S Feb 22, 2022 at 17:28 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Feb 22, 2022 at 17:28 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Feb 22, 2022 at 17:25 | answer | added | kandi | timeline score: 5 | |
| Feb 22, 2022 at 12:58 | answer | added | FluidCode | timeline score: 10 | |
| Feb 22, 2022 at 12:56 | answer | added | Timur Shtatland | timeline score: 2 | |
| Feb 22, 2022 at 12:22 | answer | added | alamar | timeline score: 45 | |
| Feb 22, 2022 at 10:00 | history | edited | TooTea | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Feb 22, 2022 at 9:51 | comment | added | TooTea | @Trilarion Well, I don't know much about diplomacy, but "Don't invade or else we'll introduce this batch of mild sanctions that you couldn't care less about!" doesn't sound like a good position to start from. "Don't invade or we'll ruin you!" sounds more likely to register on Putin's radar. | |
| Feb 22, 2022 at 9:45 | history | edited | TooTea | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 52 characters in body
|
| Feb 22, 2022 at 9:35 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | I guess they want to wait a bit more and escalate the situation not as quickly as they could to give diplomacy one more chance. You can probably expect more to come in the future though. | |
| S Feb 22, 2022 at 9:27 | review | First questions | |||
| Feb 22, 2022 at 9:29 | |||||
| S Feb 22, 2022 at 9:27 | history | asked | TooTea | CC BY-SA 4.0 |