The UK has been neither so good on Ukraine as the government would like to trumpet, nor as bad as its critics suggest.
On the merits side of the balance sheet, the UK has provided extensive military and strategic support for which it has received much Ukrainian gratitude. On the flipside, the UK has been sluggish in helping Ukrainian refugees, taking in far fewer than other European nations.
The open question — and the one that could tip the scale in either direction — is what the UK has done by way of sanctions against Russia and against Vladimir Putin’s inner circle. On the one hand, the UK has introduced a far wider swath of sanctions than it ever has before. On the other, there was an awful lot of UK-Russia business to sanction.
Advocates for the sanctions package note the UK has in many places gone further than the EU, and has encouraged Germany and others to do more than they initially wished. Critics can notice that while Canada’s government has sanctioned Alexander Lebedev, Boris Johnson first partied with, and then ennobled, his son Evgeny. The junior Lebedev has publicly criticised the recent Ukrainian invasion — but had spoken in support of the first, in 2014.
The UK’s law firms have only now given up the clients they were absolutely required to, while — as Private Eye reported last week — the UK’s major accountancy firms have used their somewhat malleable global structures to allow their Russia-based operations to continue as heretofore, zealously following the letter of sanctions law, if not always its spirit.
Other deficiencies have deadlier consequences. The UK has been part of an arms embargo against Russia since its 2014 invasion of Crimea and eastern Ukraine — but only in this latest wave of sanctions has it finally banned so-called dual-use technology, equipment that has legitimate civilian uses but can also be crucial components in military kit. As a result, UK-made transistors have been found in destroyed Russian military kit in Ukraine — including heavy-missile launchers, deployed with devastating results in civilian areas.
The UK’s longstanding laxity regarding tackling dubious gains of the ultra-wealthy is also hampering any real efforts to enforce seizure orders against the oligarch class. By claiming non-dom status and no UK income — just income from overseas — the ultra-rich can get away with filing no or minimal information to tax authorities, meaning that the British state has virtually no record of their assets.
This might not have been deliberately designed to help oligarchs avoid sanctions, but it couldn’t work much better for the purpose if it had — you can’t seize what you can’t find, and the numerous layers of trusts, shell companies, bank trails, and offshore structures that the UK is so good at helping the ultra-rich to build are proving effective.
There are even complaints at the most practically enforceable levels of sanctions. Fishermen in the waters around Shetland are complaining that Russian trawlers continue to fish in UK waters, thanks to a loophole relating to a shared zone of control with the Faroe Islands. From high finance to fisheries, Russia is seemingly doing all too well at finding ways around UK sanctions.
Much as we might imagine it to be so, this is not a problem confined to the UK. Several countries in central Europe that rely on Russia for oil or gas have caved to Russian demands to pay for their fuel in roubles, a show of power by Russia that still helps it secure much-needed foreign currency.
Other countries are dragging their heels on how long they might need to transition away from Russian oil or gas, while Hungary is helping Russia out by dragging talks in the EU over extending its sanctions regime out to be as slow as conceivably possible — with little sign Viktor Orbán will cave and allow sanctions without some commensurate giveaway in his own direction.
Each country has tried — and most continue to try — to mould the sanctions package in ways to suit them — excluding luxury goods or particular services beloved by the oligarch class and provided by them, be it diamonds or high fashion.
Every country talks about its willingness to sacrifice for the purposes of making a stand against Russia, but each country would prefer if others shouldered most of the burden.
The unprecedentedly unified stand democratic nations have made in response to Russia’s unparalleled aggression in Ukraine has been noticed by the world — it has changed the political calculus for would-be autocrats considering their own expansionist moves. Keeping that new world and that new logic requires both sticking the course and making the sanctions actually effective.
Part of the challenge of doing that in the UK is that many of those at the top of politics benefited hugely from the pre-sanctions system — Russian money flowed through the City of London, its banks, its law firms, its PR and lobbying houses, and through donations into the Conservative Party.
The government has the chance to show the world those days are over, and to pick up about the last hope of good PR it has among the mire of the endless “partygate” scandal and its dismal response to the cost-of-living crisis.
But that relies on it actually working to beef up the National Crime Agency and HMRC’s ability to track down the assets of the ultra-rich. It relies on it ramping up the sanctions, even on those who senior ministers used to regard as friends. It relies on it showing the UK is no longer willing to be the butler to the oligarchs who helped Putin amass his fortune and build his army.
That the chances of this actually happening feel so slight and so dismal is testimony to how little faith most of us have left in Johnson’s ability to do anything that isn’t venal or self-serving.
But this is the last issue on which he feels he has a good reputation — perhaps the last issue on which he could hope to have any kind of positive legacy. Might an eye to history overcome Johnson’s usual inaction?
The article is, if anything, understating how very effective Russia has been in corrupting and buying influence in the UK over the past two decades. It does not, for example, say anything about the flood of Russian funds that paid, illegally, for the Brexit campaign and so helped strike a devastating blow against both the UK and the EU. It also omits the various murders carried out on British soil with impunity by agents of the Russian government, which is a coalition of the FSB (the KGB as was) and Russian organised crime networks.
Ah yes, all that too. Nationalism is easily mobilized, and always in the service of destruction.
On the latter point, this looks interesting:
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/may/31/once-upon-a-time-in-londongrad-review-putin-deaths-russian
The New European, that articles are published here at Crikey often, has reported also on ‘influence’ (13 January 2022) with shared interests across the Atlantic, into Russia and Brexit, in:
’55 Tufton Street, SW1: The most influential address you’ve never heard of. It’s home to pro-Brexit groups and climate change sceptics. But just how much power over this government is wielded by the tenants of 55 Tufton Street?…
….Tenants of No.55 have included Leave Means Leave, the climate change sceptics of the Global Warming Policy Forum and Net Zero Watch, the “anti-woke” New Culture Forum, the anti-surveillance group Big Brother Watch and Migration Watch, which led the charge for lower net immigration.’
If the Tories are like our former corrupt so-called govt they wont care about their legacy. Their only interest is personally accumulating their own wealth by acting for the benefit of the billionaires for secret post political gain. Unless some thing serious happens we will never find out what rewards these corrupt officials a accumulating out of sight.
The main country to benefit from sanctions against Russia is the U.S. The moment the Gazprom spigot was to be fully opened, they, through NATO, poked the Russian bear. Like with Iraqi grain sanctions, the U.S will come to the rescue, at a price premium. After all this time, has not anyone figured out they do not want the EU (originally to include Russia), to be a major trading rival? Might be worth remembering that ‘going after Russian assets’ will apply to anyone deemed to be ‘against’ U.S interests. Zelensky has been ‘sold a pup’ and the Ukrainian people are dying, along with Russians. There is no high moral ground here.
When a TV film star playing a president actually becomes president, who would have thought that he would lead his country into war with over a quarter of his population refugees? Would a professional politician have achieved a less costly compromise. After all did he actually believe that the massive army on his border was there for a picnic?
I see the US Ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield said the United States was prepared to give “comfort letters” to shipping and insurance companies to help facilitate exports of Russian grain and fertilizer. “Comfort letters” sounds kind of benign…at first glance.
The US reflagged Iraqi oil tankers as Amerikan during the Iran/Iraq war in the hope of casus belli should one of them be lost on the trip out the Straits of Hormuz.
Don’t be surprised if they do the same in the Black Sea which is now, effectively, a Russian lake.
The Bay of Tonkin?
No similarity.
The “Gulf of Tonkin Incident” in 1964 was a straight out lie that a pair of Vietnamese coastal patrol vessel attacked two US destroyers, the Maddox & Turner Joy.
This provided LBJ with casus belli. for direct US engagement.
Prior to that it had only been providing the puppet regime in Saigon with materiel & thousands of well armed advisors.
Ah, I see the difference. I guess they are providing the materiel and invisible ‘advisors’ this time too. Maybe contractors and any silly ‘westerners’ eager for any fight.
Would you trust a “comfort letter” from the US?
“The unprecedentedly unified stand democratic nations have made in response to Russia’s unparalleled aggression in Ukraine has been noticed by the world” should read “The unprecedentedly unified stand Western nations have made in response to Russia’s aggression in Ukraine has been noticed by the world”.
Russian aggression is no worse than Western aggression in the Middle East and elsewhere and it is primarily “the West” using illegal sanctions (by ignoring WTO and other supposedly “rules based order” international conventions). The other 85% of the World cares not one jot.
What they are paying attention to is “The Wests” illegal breaches of the “rules based order” and its weaponisation of financial systems. This is making this 85% of the world look to cease trading/dealing in USD/Euro/GBP and instead trade in contracts in multiple non-Western currencies. The West has no idea the damage they are doing to their “cash cows” as the RTW wake up to the realization that “the West” can’t be trusted. In addition, funding Ukraine’s purchase of Western weapons (using borrowed funds themselves) is only increasing their own debt burdens as well as that of Ukraine. This will increase economic pressures in the West even further.
All this to “save” a Ukrainian Dictator who has canceled Parliament and gotten rid of the Opposition?