Monthly Archives: September 2014

‘Putin’ Sanctions on Russia

The continuation of European Union and US sanctions against Russia coupled with Russia’s retaliations serve only to maim the European economy as a whole, and should cease.

Since Russia’s occupation of Crimea in March the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) have intensified sanctions and restrictions on numerous major Russian institutions. The European and Western sanctions have targeted numerous senior Russian officials, separatists’ commanders, and even Russian firms suspect of weakening Ukrainian sovereignty have been blacklisted. In addition, on September 12, the European Union introduced sanctions targeting Russia’s state finances, energy, and arms sectors, areas run by the influential around President Vladimir Putin. Sanctions have caused Russia to retaliate with its’ own bans on foods imported from the EU, USA, Norway, Canada, and Australia.

It must be noted that Putin himself has not been included on sanctions lists, as Western leaders still wish to be able to meet him and place diplomatic pressure on him, as they still require Russian cooperation on issues such as North Korean and Iran. However, it seems foolish to expect Putin cooperation while the Russia economy takes direct hits internationally and domestically.

The economic sanctions now no longer solely affect Russia, but also cause other countries to face losses as well. Russia provides a high amount of oil and gas to its’ neighbouring European countries, and the international sanctions by the European Union cause innocent countries to suffer the effects. Despite decreasing in landownership significantly since the period of the U.S.S.R, Russia has become a thriving European market for Western consumer goods during the past decade.

The United States does significantly less business with Russia than the European Union, and it sanctions against Russia affect the US much less than it does Europe. It is unfair that European countries trying to provide for themselves have to suffer economically because of their business with Russia. The purpose of the sanctions is meant to halt Russia’s involvement in eastern Ukraine. However the economic restraints come at the cost of the European economy failing, especially as the Russian economy is doing poorly, nearing recession without global market access.

The sanctions are meant to serve a political goal, yet the economy is declining. The immense consequences of sanctions should be measured against any expected benefits before and after they are actually adopted against a nation. As the sanctions have caused immense European economic turmoil and minimally changed the Russian perspectives on Ukraine, alternative foreign policy tools should instead be considered, rather than a continual deterioration of European economy, namely shooting oneself in the foot.

The adaptations of European Union and US sanctions against Russia have minimal positive results, while causing the deterioration of Europe’s economy as a whole. As such, the sanctions should cease as they accomplish much less for such a high cost.

Harper Needs to Consult the Rest of Canada

As Prime Minister, Stephen Harper needs to consult the rest of the legislature and state before making major military decisions that will affect the nation. Harper can claim that the current Canadian military deployment is in a non-combative role. However, it remains the responsibility of the head of government to discuss and fairly vote upon such crucial security issues with the remainder of Parliament, and to refer the United Nations for the international issue.

The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), also known as the Islamic State, is a group of Sunni jihadists off-shooting from al-Qaeda following the US invasion of Iraq. ISIS has issued videos of brutal beheadings of American citizens, as well as released audio recordings urging jihadists to murder westerners from countries against ISIS, including Canadians, sparking controversy and fear. The United States of America began a campaign against ISIS, calling upon the aid of other nations, especially Canada. Beginning September 5 for a 30-day commitment, Canada deployed forces to aid the United States in Iraq under Harper’s majority government, without complete legislative debate or vote.  Canada’s 30-day commitment to the ISIS conflict is reaching expiry, and must consider what actions should be taken.

There are currently 69 Special Forces advisers in Iraq, supposedly purely for non-combative assistance to the United States as well. Harper’s unbalanced approach to the Islamic State crisis is rash, not to mention contrary to his 2007 vow “that any future military deployments must also be supported by a majority of parliamentarians”. Harper has neglected to consult with the remainder of the House of Commons, and hastily utilized the House confidence from his majority government, claiming to act on the behalf of the nation. In matters of security, and especially

Despite the extremely close ties to the United States of America, Harper should not have just impulsively deployed troops to Iraq without full government consultation, and with the 30-day commitment expiry fast approaching, a full legislative debate and vote need to take place. Although he has the majority political power, Prime Minister Harper must democratically consider all the advantages and disadvantages presented by Parliament, rather than pursuing his own agenda.

That Prime Minister Harper took advantage of his majority government to approve of his agenda is misuse of authoritative powers. The ISIS issue of national security concerns the whole of Canada, and any decisions to take action should be collective, representing the country rather than the desires of the majority leader. A democratic society cannot function if the head of government fails to even acknowledge or consider opposing viewpoints before making crucial decisions.

While nations such as the United States and Canada have addressed the United Nations, reprimanding the evils of the Islamic state, the United Nations still has yet to reach a consensus on any military-based courses of action to embark on. The international community must mutually agree to any combative ISIS actions. To maintain international relations (especially after losing the United Nations Security Council seat) Prime Minister Harper should heed the additional United Nations opinion of the Islamic State issue rather than following the United States’ actions without careful deliberation. A repeat of the Bush administration’s rash invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan (costing 2000 Canadian military injuries), would be disastrous.

Although non-combative troops have already been implemented to assist the United State in Iraq, Prime Minister Harper must reconsider any further military assistance to the United States in Iraq until he has consulted with Parliament, as well as the United Nations.