Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Sanctions Don't Work -- Russian Defense Minister  
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1305 times:

Paging Air America, paging Air ("Saddam was contained by UN sanctions") America! Code Blue! Code Blue!

Forget what some people say about America's liberation of Iraq. When it comes to Iran, Russia takes the view that sanctions do not, and will not, work.

Tres interessant, as the French would say. (Or would they?)

(Excerpt)

Quote:
"I know of no instances in world practice and previous experience in which sanctions have achieved their aim and proved effective," Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov told reporters during a trip to Russia's Far East.

"Moreover, I believe that the question is not so serious at the moment for the UN Security Council or the group of six to consider any introduction of sanctions. Russia stands for further political and diplomatic efforts to settle the issue."

The Security Council passed a legally binding resolution on July 31 telling Iran to suspend its nuclear enrichment programme within 30 days or risk sanctions.

Ah, the sweet, sweet irony -- deliceux!

Don't you just love diplomacy?

See:

http://english.people.com.cn/200608/26/eng20060826_297081.html

[Edited 2006-08-26 13:55:00]

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1291 times:

Well, they'd certainly have a better shot at being a tad bit more effective if some countries ::cough::Russia::cough:: would honor the damn things . . .

As long as there exists any country willing to covertly funnel supplies to a country under UN (Yeah, I know - UN -  laughing  ) sanctions, any sanction will be less effective.


User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1287 times:

Regarding Iraq, the Franco-Russian axis at the UN -- what some might call the "Axis of Weasels" -- intentionally forced America's hand, and in some ways, we were their willing patsy.

We're being set up yet again, folks. America (was) (will be) the "bad cop" on Ira(q)(n), while Russia, France, and even China end up smelling like that certain floral tournament in Pasadena on New Year's Day.

[Edited 2006-08-26 14:01:59]

User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1271 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Thread starter):
Forget what some people say about America's liberation of Iraq. When it comes to Iran, Russia takes the view that sanctions do not, and will not, work.

On the one hand, I am pleased that some high level official in the world finally has the balls to admit that sanctions don't work (which most sensible people figured out a decade ago.)

On the other hand it seems that Russia is suggesting we should give Iran a pass.

If sanctions don't work, the next step up is blockade. You have to find something that works short of war. Iran imports all its gasoline, a blockade will certainly cause Iran's economy to screech to a halt.


User currently offlineDL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11446 posts, RR: 76
Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1253 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 3):
On the other hand it seems that Russia is suggesting we should give Iran a pass.

The politics of being told to go along to get along.

This is amazing since it's coming from one of the worlds largest sanctions busters.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineOlegShv From Sweden, joined Mar 2006, 683 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1252 times:

FYI, Libia's Kaddafi had a nuclear program and his country was under UN sanctions. They smuggled all of their stuff from Pakistan. The only reason Kaddafi surrendered is that he thought he would be "liberated" as in the case with Saddam.

Iran does not even need to go to Russia for nuclear technology - it's even closer to them then you would think. Look at the map - it's in Pakistan. So indeed the sanctions don't really work that well. Even if the sanctions would work, Iran will still get their nuclear bomb as did Pakistan.
Looking at the way things are going in Iraq, I doubt even the Brits will want to go along with US to fight another war in the Gulf.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 1):
Well, they'd certainly have a better shot at being a tad bit more effective if some countries ::cough::Russia::cough:: would honor the damn things . . .

Please show us examples there Russia did not honor those damn things.

Thanks.


User currently offlineSoyuzavia From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 594 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1245 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
Regarding Iraq, the Franco-Russian axis at the UN -- what some might call the "Axis of Weasels" -- intentionally forced America's hand, and in some ways, we were their willing patsy.

What's this Axis of Weasels rubbish?

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
We're being set up yet again, folks. America (was) (will be) the "bad cop" on I(q)(n), while Russia, France, and even China end up smelling like that certain floral tournament in Pasadena on New Year's Day.

HAHA. Your own government set itself up on Iraq, and is setting itself up on Iran. Where does one get off, honestly, in trying to pin any of this on Russia, France, and even China. Blame yourselves for your own screw ups, not others.

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 3):
On the one hand, I am pleased that some high level official in the world finally has the balls to admit that sanctions don't work (which most sensible people figured out a decade ago.)

Putin, and many world leaders, have been saying this for several years already.

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 3):
On the one hand, I am pleased that some high level official in the world finally has the balls to admit that sanctions don't work (which most sensible people figured out a decade ago.)

I have much respect for Sergei Borisovich, but feel that Minister of Defence isn't the right position for him. He should be elevated, post-2008, to a higher position.

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 3):
On the other hand it seems that Russia is suggesting we should give Iran a pass.

Only you Charles are suggesting that Russia is suggesting that. Russia is doing no such thing.

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 3):
If sanctions don't work, the next step up is blockade. You have to find something that works short of war. Iran imports all its gasoline, a blockade will certainly cause Iran's economy to screech to a halt.

And how exactly does one intend to blockade Iran? Whoever controls the Strait of Hormuz, controls the Persian Gulf, and control of Hormuz is held by Iran. In fact, the US and 'west' only have access to oil because of Iran keeping the strait open - Iran could easily shut off the Strait of Hormuz to all traffic

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 1):
Well, they'd certainly have a better shot at being a tad bit more effective if some countries ::cough::Russia::cough:: would honor the damn things . . .

Yeah way to go ANC. What sanctions are these exactly?

Well you know what. At least Russia doesn't place sanctions on a country, then turns around and secretly starts illegally breaking those sanctions - what's even worse is that those who are caught have no action taken against them (i.e. Reagan) or are rehabilitated (Ollie North) and are then turned into national heroes.


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1232 times:

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 6):
Only you Charles are suggesting that Russia is suggesting that. Russia is doing no such thing.

Then where are their proposals? It is worse than useless to say, "don't do X" if you cannot give an alternative proposal.


User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1204 times:

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 6):
What's this Axis of Weasels rubbish?

Example: When it comes to actually imposing the sanctions on Iran to which the most recent UN resolution referred, it appears that Russia has backed down.

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 6):
Where does one get off, honestly, in trying to pin any of this on Russia, France, and even China. Blame yourselves for your own screw ups, not others

Oh, I do blame ourselves -- for being, at times, too deferential to international opinion.

But in another way, I see us as attempting to mediate between two poles of public opinion, and doing so in a sometimes-successful, sometimes-pathetic way. It would be folly to say that everything that our State Department has done was part of a pattern of preplanned excellence. But there is something of Machiavelli in its thinking, though, perhaps, not quite enough.

As regards Iran, I'd still like to know whether Russia believes that sanctions will really work, and if they don't, what Russia intends to do about it, besides bluster. Because, at least from our experience, ploys for negotiation are easily made -- they are as cheap as air itself -- and the "achievement" of time required for negotiation means that valuable currency has been given for the development of an Iranian nuclear deterrent.

[Edited 2006-08-28 04:25:22]

User currently offlineCairo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks ago) and read 1194 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
We're being set up yet again, folks. America (was) (will be) the "bad cop" on Ira(q)(n), while Russia, France, and even China end up smelling like that certain floral tournament in Pasadena on New Year's Day.

Right except for the part about America being set up.

As in the life of an individual, when bad things happen to America it is usually in large part because of what America itself has done. Bush fought a war against an Iraq which was no threat to America - and the fallout from this war means that America has no non-draft military capability available and has completely wasted its moral credibility in the world.

The world, thanks to Bush, sees America as morally bankrupt and the biggest threat to peace anywhere - now Americans gets to sit back and thank the political leadership for the brilliant Iraqi adventure while Iran moves steadily towards nuclear capability.

Of course sanctions won't work and Iran won't give up on their nuclear ambitions. There are only two things that can stop them now, IMO, namely:

1> Israel strategically bombs their nuclear program to ruins, which I believe analysts have said is impossible due to lessons learned from Iraq, or
2> a terrorist act or some other provocation blamed on Iran turns American and world opinion around to the point of justifying military force


Cairo


User currently offlineOlegShv From Sweden, joined Mar 2006, 683 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1177 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 8):
what Russia intends to do about it, besides bluster.

Let's leave Russia alone for a second. What is USA going to do about it besides bluster? Let's say hypothetically Russia and China approve the sanctions. End result: Iran still gets their nuclear capability, albeit several years later than it would have in a different scenario. Does it change things - yes. Everyone will have to deal with a rather pissed nuclear capable country governed by religious fundamentalists. Having sanctions in place or not, it's only a matter of how long it will take them to develop nuclear weapons.

The other possible scenario is a "preemptive" war that current US administration had executed in Iraq and messed themselves up. I highly doubt that such decision will be very popular in the US or any other country for that sake.


User currently offlineSoyuzavia From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 594 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1164 times:

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 7):
Then where are their proposals? It is worse than useless to say, "don't do X" if you cannot give an alternative proposal.

Russia has put plenty of proposals forward, and it is those proposals which is keeping Iran at the negotiating table...

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 8):
Example: When it comes to actually imposing the sanctions on Iran to which the most recent UN resolution referred, it appears that Russia has backed down.

Russia backed down? What on earth are you talking about? Russia has NEVER AT ANY STAGE supported ANY sanctions on Iran. Not even remotely supported. And why the hell should they? As Putin and Lavrov have said no less than 200,000 times, Iran has a right to possess nuclear energy, and Russia is doing everything to ensure that they can't (and won't) possess nuclear weapons.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 8):

As regards Iran, I'd still like to know whether Russia believes that sanctions will really work, and if they don't, what Russia intends to do about it, besides bluster.

Read not one paragraph above. Where exactly has any Russian senior government official EVER gone on the public record as being in support of any sanctions on Iran?

As to what plans Russia has, how about you get over your own bluster, go read some international news on this entire issue over the 18 months, and then come back and talk about what Russia would like to pursue in regards to Iran.

And just remember one thing: Iran is NOT an enemy of Russia. But rather they are allies (to some extent). The only country which is blustering in this whole affair is the one country which made itself an enemy of Iran - the good ol' USofA.

International sanctions against Iran would be meaningless, they wouldn't achieve a damned thing. The international community needs to engage Iran on an equal level - that is discuss with them and come to agreements, not talk down to them and dare to lecture them as Washington has been doing from behind the scenes since this (non) crisis began.

Quoting Cairo (Reply 9):
1> Israel strategically bombs their nuclear program to ruins, which I believe analysts have said is impossible due to lessons learned from Iraq, or

Not so much impossible due to lessons learned from Iraq, but because Iran has the defensive capability in place to be able to deal with any potential Israeli strike - capability thankfully provided by Russia.

Quoting OlegShv (Reply 10):
The other possible scenario is a "preemptive" war that current US administration had executed in Iraq and messed themselves up. I highly doubt that such decision will be very popular in the US or any other country for that sake.

Precisely. And Iran in 2006 is not a country which can be compared to the Iran of the 1980s - militarily speaking, when it truly was an international pariah and during which time Iraq was able to score some victories (albeit temporary ones) on the Islamic Republic. The Iran of today is a well armed and well trained force. Not to mention there wouldn't be any public support in Iran for such an overthrow - those in power would naturally be against it, and the people themselves (even those who are anti-current government) have a clear memory of American support of Iraq during the war on their country.


User currently offlineTu204 From Russia, joined Mar 2006, 1139 posts, RR: 17
Reply 12, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1148 times:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
Regarding Iraq, the Franco-Russian axis at the UN -- what some might call the "Axis of Weasels" -- intentionally forced America's hand, and in some ways, we were their willing patsy.

God damnit the U.S. attacked and destroyed a sovreign country that posted absolutely no threat to them under fasle pretenses!!!

Quoting Cfalk (Reply 3):
If sanctions don't work, the next step up is blockade. You have to find something that works short of war. Iran imports all its gasoline, a blockade will certainly cause Iran's economy to screech to a halt.

And it would also make the price of oil go somewhere around $115...and this would screech your economy and that of alot of countries to a halt.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 8):
Example: When it comes to actually imposing the sanctions on Iran to which the most recent UN resolution referred, it appears that Russia has backed down.

Ummm, because they are absolutely pointless?

Quoting Cairo (Reply 9):
a terrorist act or some other provocation blamed on Iran turns American and world opinion around to the point of justifying military force

That would be a cheap shot. But you must also realise that Iran is not Iraq and the United States will have quite a problem with any invasion as it will bring heavy losses.



I do not dream about movie stars, they must dream about me for I am real and they are not. - Alexander Popov
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1133 times:

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 11):
Russia has NEVER AT ANY STAGE supported ANY sanctions on Iran. Not even remotely supported.

Soyuzavia, the Russian government abstained, and did not vote against, the UN atomic watchdog agency's last decision, which was to refer Iran to the UN Security Council. It was widely known that this meant that sanctions would be the probable next stelp.

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 11):
Where exactly has any Russian senior government official EVER gone on the public record as being in support of any sanctions on Iran?

I think the record speaks for itself, as noted above.

Quoting Soyuzavia (Reply 11):
And just remember one thing: Iran is NOT an enemy of Russia. But rather they are allies (to some extent). The only country which is blustering in this whole affair is the one country which made itself an enemy of Iran - the good ol' USofA.

That's incorrect. European countries as well as the United States supported the UN agency's referral, mentioned above.

Quoting OlegShv (Reply 10):
Everyone will have to deal with a rather pissed nuclear capable country governed by religious fundamentalists. Having sanctions in place or not, it's only a matter of how long it will take them to develop nuclear weapons.

This is merely a counsel of despair. We might as well give up and give nuclear weapons to any country that wants it, then. But that's not how it works. The "international community" has a right to protect itself, and one way that both the United States and Europe have decided to do so is to prevent Iran from possessing nuclear weapons. You can argue that this isn't fair, but at any rate, it's based on fact.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
11500 Feet Down And Both Chutes Don't Work posted Mon Aug 23 2004 15:11:09 by L-188
More Evidence That Gun Bans Don't Work posted Thu May 20 2004 07:50:28 by L-188
How I Hate Computers That Don't Work! posted Fri Nov 14 2003 09:37:39 by UTA_flyinghigh
Russian Deputy Minister Killed In Crash posted Sun Jan 27 2002 15:48:08 by B747ca
Ex-Russian Prime Minister Wants Apology From Bush. posted Sat Nov 11 2000 15:37:08 by Mx5_boy
Russian General: U.S. Missile Defense A Threat posted Thu Oct 19 2006 03:11:40 by AerospaceFan
North Korea: Can Sanctions Work? posted Sat Oct 14 2006 23:21:30 by 9V
Don't Sleep At Work. You May Get Sacked posted Wed Jan 19 2005 18:00:44 by HAWK21M
UK Work Permits? posted Wed Nov 22 2006 05:58:29 by AA787823
Who's At Work On New Yrs Eve? posted Tue Nov 21 2006 21:51:58 by Zruda