Do you think the sanctions are having a significant effect in terms of slowing down the war effort?
Vladimir Kara-Murza expressed the same ideas much more eloquently on the press conference that followed the prisoner swap in August: https://newsukraine.rbc.ua/news/russian-opposition-figure-ka...
In my own opinion, a good step in the right direction would be if we could travel to European countries as easily as we used to be able to. Then more people could see with their own eyes that they're being lied to.
I don't agree. Russia's regime threatens Europe with invasion and nuclear bombs almost on a daily basis, and vilify everyone who doesn't enthusiastically support their invasion of Ukraine. A few years ago Russia even had a nuclear bomber circling the coast of western Europe.
This behavior is not limited to government. It's not unheard of having Russian tourists insulting and threatening locals. In Europe or in any corner of the world. There are also Russian citizens attacking refugees and asylum seekers in foreign soil, even Russia's own war dodgers.
You cannot expect to systematically threat neighbors and still demand or even expect them to continue to cater to the whims of the agressor. It is a voluntary relationship that cuts both ways.
When you start a war, you should expect to experience war.
I live in one of the most touristic cities in the world (Rio de Janeiro) and after meeting hundreds of Russians, that's the first time I hear about it.
The anger is justified, but misdirected.
Would every US American be happy to be identified as Trump and Project2025 supporter, in case he wins the elections?
How much is it my responsibility what my government does, if all I have is basically one vote, if even that, and it is life threatening to even voice (and form) my opinion?
That's industrial-grade gaslighting. A regime doesn't simply start an invasion. It's not even the first one in recent years, too. Russia's regime decided to invade Ukraine in 2014, and make it a full blown military invasion in 2022. You can't weasel-word your way around that.
Also, you may want to look at the definition of „gaslighting“, where you create another confusion by applying it to this context.
The population overwhelmingly supports the war: https://www.levada.ru/cp/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/3.png
The support is surprisingly uniform across age groups and urban/rural divide: https://www.levada.ru/cp/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/4.png
Yeah right because when someone calls people and asks effectively "do you support the war or do you want to go to jail" you totally get data that is not skewed in any way whatsoever.
Being openly against the war is literally illegal.
In short, speculationg how people "really" think is pointless if they support the war in words and actions. Actions shape the world, not innermost thoughts that are never revealed to anyone. Your anti-war thoughts are worthless if you show up at a munitions factory every morning and produce artillery shells all day long.
That line of argument is old and tired and debunked. We also have witnessed in Europe the sad spectacle that is Russian diasporas throwing protests in support of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and repeated violent attacks from Russian expats targeting Ukrainian refugees.
https://www.newsweek.com/russians-ukrainian-refugees-attack-...
It's very odd how this whole talk of oppression and free speech crackdowns only surfaces in the context of sanctions.
Hate to have to point this out - but not only is this a complete non-story (just from first principles) -- but the piece you're quoting is itself is basically a standard tabloid-style scare article. I mean, just look at the title, will you:
Russians Are Hunting Down Ukrainian Refugees in Heart of NATO
That in itself should clue you into to the article's primary purpose -- not to provide useful information, but to keep you titillated by "that awful shiny thing over there", and inevitably wanting more, more, more.
But it actually gets worse from there. Quoting Bild (a real-life, old school tabloid), when in all probability they could have connected with any of the fine regional papers up there, should have been another major red flag. Oh and did you try reading and breaking down the actual 3 stories it cites to support its grand thesis? Pop quiz - do they even pertain to the article's actual substantive claim? (Answer: the headline story doesn't apply at all; the second does (but it's an isolated incident with 1 confirmed perpetrator); and the last one does but only partially, as it obviously conflates with an entirely different issue).
That's all it is, this article -- just adrenaline-pumping garbage. All rather harrowing what happened to the victims identified, and maybe there is something nefarious happening in Slovakia -- but articles like these just aren't useful go-to sources for any sense of what's really happening in the large.
They exist simply to distract, distract, distract.
Does the same apply to the Crimean status referendum?
But it's also a different topic (in a thread that has already drifted wildly off-topic).
And even if it was true, that opinion would simply be an indicator of the success of government propaganda. (Lies and myths and skewed narratives, not to be confused with gaslighting.)
Take Russians in Latvia, for example:
https://eng.lsm.lv/article/society/society/less-than-half-of... (2022)
https://eng.lsm.lv/article/society/society/13.07.2023-survey... (2023)
What you are pointing at is nothing new. Naive attempts to "build bridges" with people who see bridges only as an easy way of driving a tank over to us is how we got here in the first place:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wandel_durch_Handel (German/EU policy towards Russia)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset (Obama-era attempts)
Misguided attempts to build relations with countries run by criminal gangs have made no positive impact on them, but have poisoned us by opening up our politics, businesses, and other areas of life to their criminal networks.
This and even more has been already tried, albeit somewhat inadvertently. Look at the neighboring Belarus. After Chernobyl, a fair share of kids and teens went on to spend their vacations in EU countries: Italy, UK, Austria, Belgium were the most welcoming, AFAIR.
At least 1/3 of Belarusian kids have been through one of the many Chernobyl kids programmes, many of them multiple times.
I was among those kids, as well as Svetlana Tsikhanouskaya who continued accompanying kids as a student, then as a teacher until her 30ies.
This definitely changed many individual lives for the better, but has it changed the country for better? I bet no.
What about the freezing (and probable eventual seizure) of $300b of CBRF assets (apparently 60 percent its total foreign currency reserves)? That's got to be causing some significant pain, somewhere.
You can't withdraw more than $10k of USD or EUR cash combined from all foreign currency accounts in each bank, and you can only withdraw the money that was there before March 2022. Past that limit and for any money you received after March, you can only withdraw it as rubles at the CBRF exchange rate, iirc. Most banks also treat dollars and euros like they're radioactive and will hit you with monthly fees if you have too much. So in the end we have three different exchange rates for these currencies: the CBRF one, the one for online operations with those "virtual" dollars and euros in currency accounts, and the "real" one for cash.
1. Sanctions sped up the formation of the class of war beneficiaries. Sanctions created the demand for sanction circumvention. Since their scope is huge, the demand is accordingly very high (from civil consumers to the government). This led to formation of new supply chains that keep being profitable only while the war and sanctions continue. Now thousands of people engaged in these activities have the monetary incentive to support the war and the government course. This one I deem to be the most consequential in the long term.
2. Any noticeable conflict or rights violation happening with Russian citizens abroad is to be blown out of proportion and presented as a confirmation of pervasive anti-Russian sentiment and support the government narrative of existing encircled by enemies.
3. The lack of accessible ways of integration of the emigrants into local societies (especially in Europe) led to thousands of them coming back, some unwillingly, some grudgingly and feeling disillusioned. This is a huge wasted opportunity and I don't get why it happened (I don't buy the "we must secure our countries against possible threat actors and dirty money" explanation).
It's also telling that the reaction from those affected is to complain that sanctions should be reverted because they both don't work and are inconvenient and a nuisance.
The feedback mechanism you're complaining about is a problem on the side of those being inconvenienced. If they want to complain, they need to direct their complains to their own regime, and address the problems they are causing everyone around them.
It's also very telling that the reaction is to complain about mild inconveniences while turning a blind eye to the whole war of aggression, terrorism, and pervasive threats of global Armageddon from their very own government. That, strangely enough, is not an inconvenience nor an issue requiring attention.
Tourism seems to be a right to them, but others don't even have a right to exist?
Does that warrant any accountability at all, or does the blame lie always elsewhere?
And get arrested and charged with "discrediting the armed forces", right. Must be nice to write all that from the comfort of your Western home.
If you don't register that as a problem but somehow limiting your tourism options is a concern, that is already telling regarding what your priorities are.
Go back and read more carefully please.
(And also: they very obviously do register the problem you're referring to, and there's no way to read their statement otherwise).
Yes there is. From Europe's side, one of the most basic things that can be done is stop taking in tourists from a nation hell-bent on starting wars of invasion with neighboring countries and threaten the whole world with nuclear Armageddon.
Cutting economic ties is also a good strong start.
If those hypothetical tourists don't feel strongly about their own nation conducting genocide or bombing hospitals or blowing up damns then perhaps in the very least they should understand that it's something that can negatively affect them too and perhaps, even for the worst possible reasons such as inconveniencing their travel plans, that should not be something they support.
And yet here we are, arguing that changes in travel plans are unfair while ignoring a full blown existencial war.
We do feel strongly about it but we can't act on these feelings. The government is not taking any feedback.
Again, it's like screaming into the void at something you can't change, like weather. Except in this case, if you scream loudly enough, you will get arrested and charged with "discrediting the Russian armed forces" or "spreading fake information about the use of Russian armed forces". First time it's a fine, subsequent times it's a felony.
That's a problem you need to solve.
Again, it's very telling that this only registers as a concern when the subject of mild inconveniences, such as not benefiting from the privilege of visiting some countries as tourists, is brought up.
It's also very telling that the only argument that's expressed in favour of dropping sanctions against Russia is this puerile expectation that Russian citizens should not be subjected to mild inconveniences. Aren't Ukrainians or Georgians entitled to the same expectations?
I'm open to suggestions about possible solutions to this problem.
And by the way, I'm not talking about myself as a tourist right now. I was saying that Russian people in general being able to easily visit European countries would lessen the Russian official propaganda's grip on the population.
And those sanctions against the civil aviation industry are nothing but straight vandalism.
And the inconveniences aren't mild.
You're very plainly attacking a straw man here. Talk about puerile.
That's what war is, unfortunately. Millions of people in Ukraine are currently being "punished" for exactly the same offense, only in ways infinitely worse, as I don't need to tell you.
There was absolutely no reason the war had to coming into being at all. But now that we're stuck with it, the only effective questions are -- what can be done to hasten its end; provide some level of justice for those affected the worst; and to make it clear to the responsible parties that something like this can never be allowed to happen on European soil ever again?
For their own part -- it's not like the Western governments really have any other choice. Even though the sanctions are having a far more limited effect than they initially hoped -- they simply couldn't keep doing business with Russia as usual after what happened in 2022. That's all there is to it.
Meaning, they've no choice but to apply the strongest possible sanctions as they might reasonably be able to (for some definition of "reasonable"). It's a cold and calculated strategy - but again, they didn't chose this situation, and that's the moral calculus that they are now forced to adopt in response to the situation that Putin created for them.
Russia is a dictatorship, what are you doing to change that? Just complaining that there isn't anything you can do won't change anything.
Why should we in the west go out of our way to not inconvenience you? If you are not resisting the russian government, then you are passively helping them, why would I even consider it negative that sanctions bother you?