Эссе на тему: "Why China is usually excluded from the “dialogue of civilisations”?"

The aim of this essay is to answer the question: “Why China is usually excluded from the “dialogue of civilisations”?. The actuality of the topic is undeniable, because China has become a powerful pole of the world economy and is now aiming at leadership in world politics. For Russia, the new Chinese strategy means both new challenges caused by Beijing's global ambitions and new opportunities associated with its readiness to bear its share of responsibility for world development. China's economic transformation has changed not only the domestic life of the country, but also the entire world economy.
China is the second largest economy in the world. It invests in countries all over the world, and these investments are provided under certain conditions. As China expands its foothold in Africa, the middle East, Australia and further Asia, it may not be able to support such expansion if the economy in the metropolis is not stable. China has many attributes of a superpower. For example, China is the world's first-largest population, the second - largest economy, the second - largest army, the largest exporter, the second - largest recipient of foreign direct investment, the largest producer of a wide range of goods, has the largest currency reserve, the largest hydroelectric power station, not to mention the largest concentration of millionaires and billionaires.
David Sambuc in his book "China goes global", published in 2012, argues that China is a player on the world stage, but not a superpower. The author motivates this opinion by the fact that a real superpower can influence other peoples and events, and China has never used its influence in any region to achieve the desired result for itself.
China lacks the global support that the US received after World War II, becoming an anchor of economic stability in the world. Beijing receives support in Asia, which allows it to act as a Central country within the continent, but Western countries fear China, as evidenced by the creation of the TPP.
In 1949, China was cut off from the rest of the world, the Communist government even failed to get a place in the UN. The people's Republic of China was isolated during the cold war.
65 years ago, the US authorities declared their categorical rejection of the idea of membership in the UN of China. However, it took very little time for China to become a member of The United Nations. The question of China's inclusion was within the competence of the General Assembly, and the veto power that the United States had in the security Council did not become an obstacle to the international recognition of Beijing [1].
An attempt to ignore the importance of the Chinese economy and its prospects is a serious omission of the countries of the world. Most importantly, despite its challenges, the critical importance of the Chinese economy is now widely recognized. Recent international achievements of the country, in particular its ability to enlist the support of Britain, France, Germany and Italy for the Asian infrastructure investment Bank, despite opposition from the United States, suggest a high degree of confidence that China will successfully solve its problems.
China's role within existing international financial institutions may also change this year. In December, the international monetary Fund will consider including the Renminbi in a currency basket covering the Fund's units of account, known as special drawing rights (SDRs), along with the us dollar, the Euro, the British pound and the Japanese yen. And the world is still waiting for the US to implement the IMF reform of 2010, which will strengthen the position of China and other major emerging economies in the governance structure of institutions. Given the importance of the Chinese economy, to continue in any way to leave it without attention – it can be called anything but the norm. The yuan rate broke two-year highs amid news of its inclusion in the reserves of several Central banks in Europe. The expectation of the start of oil futures trading in yuan also contributes to the strengthening of the national currency of China. However, analysts do not predict an easy exit of Chinese money to the world market. The US and a number of developing countries fear the dominance of the yuan, and the very structure of China's economy has not yet been prepared to launch the national currency on the international platform [2].
Let`s consider G7. This group started from G5(US, Japan, West Germany, France and UK) on 1973, Italy joined on 1975, made it as G6. Canada made it as G7 on 1976.
China was still an agricultural country with totally different ideologies.
As a reward of dissolving Soviet Union, Russia joined on 1991 and made it as G8. But actually Russia was kind of being cheated, the other 7 countries did not treat Russia fairly as Russia expected.
China started to revive after joining WTO, and China started its own group: The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, SCO.
Even though China is not a member of G8, but China is a member of G20.
The G7 summit, concluded in 2015 in Germany; Chinese experts and media have hardly demonstrated interest in this outdated informal organization, except for the Declaration on Maritime Security of the G7 foreign Ministers. The Declaration expressed their concerns about "unilateral actions" in the South China sea, and China was a clear target.
Russia and China are the main targets of discussion at the G7 summit. They decided to continue to put pressure on Russia against the backdrop of the ongoing Ukrainian crisis. As for China, the discussions focused on issues related to the Asian infrastructure Investment Bank and the East China and South China seas. But it is worth noting that European countries have demonstrated positions different from the US and Japan on both issues.
Whether the G7 will become a geopolitical tool-a relic of the cold war - depends largely on European countries. Unlike the US, Europe has closer geopolitical and economic ties with Russia. As for the disputes over the East China and South China seas, which are thousands of kilometers away from the European continent, these countries do not need to get involved in them.
During the G7 summit, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe tried to drag European countries to Japan's anti-Chinese position.
China equated the G7 with the IMF and the World Bank, two organizations that Beijing will soon challenge its Asian infrastructure Investment Bank and the silk Road Fund. Publicly China is very cautious with the choice of a conciliatory position in relation to the existing multilateral lenders. This partly reflects the fact that China does not want to "ruffle feathers" Western countries, which have taken a very tangible risk by supporting the AIIB despite the fierce opposition of the United States. However, apart from this, an openly critical position with regard to organizations whose goals are obviously similar to AIIB carries the risk of an erroneous signal to countries that depend on the assistance of supranational organizations. That is, equating the IMF, the World Bank and the Bank of Asia.
Now there are good chances to attract China to active and mutually beneficial cooperation on the world stage by including the country in the G8 instead of Russia.
Then in 2008, the sub-prime mortgage crisis hit. All G7 members went down the tube. So what do you do? You go look for somebody with money, yes, those despised “developing countries” who have been saving their pennies. Like China, India, Brazil, … I mean, seriously, all G7 countries, other than Germany, are in debt up to their necks. Do you expect them to manage their economy to the debtors’ satisfaction, or to the lenders’ satisfaction? So, from 2008 and onward, the G7 group completely changed its focus, from global economy to politics. The economic forum is taken over by G-20 major economies, which China participates.
China and Russia make strategic allience to form BRICS block for economy to againts the West side. China have interest as the biggest producer in the world today and russia also fell as minority member of G7–8. Their combo try to Force down petrodollar domination with russia as thebody guard (weapon mastery) and china as top world producer and biggest world GDP bases on PPP since 2014.
The opinion of the Chinese side is not interesting, especially in the US, where such self-sufficient decisions are made. They are ready to cooperate with China in trade and other areas, but not on defense, in particular, on Syria.
TPP was initiated by Obama majorly to strengthen political ties with Asian Nations. The sole purpose Obama pushed it hard for TPP was containment of China.
Rise of China as economically and strategically important nation is threatening America’s role in Asia.
The USA is trying to contain the growth of China through various strategic and political moves. TPP was just one of them.
China Containment Policy is a political term referring to a claimed goal of U.S. foreign policy to diminish the economic and political growth of the People's Republic of China.
Some economist argue that TPP would benefit the USA for mere 0.01–0.1% of their GDP. Obama was no fool to invest in a policy that is doing so little good to their economy. Strategic importance was the reason behind the formation of TPP policy.
Now Trump government pulling out from TPP, it would be interesting to see what other measures is USA going to adopt to maintain its supremacy in Asia and in world for that matter.
On the other hand, we can refute the fact that China does not participate in world politics.
The current global geopolitical situation is characterized by a noticeable strengthening of the "Chinese" factor in world politics, which is now characterized by the following features:
- the high dynamism of changes in the international structure, which manifested itself with the emergence in the 21st century of such organizations as the SCO, BRICS, group "20", in which China appears as a country that structures this system and occupies a leading position in it;
- critical instability in the world economy and global Finance, China's position with its annual stable growth again looks not only more advantageous, but also dominant, and if we add here the increase in China's share in the IMF, China in General is the only beneficiary country;
- the emergence of regional conflicts in the middle East (Syria, Iran, Israel-Palestine), and now in the zone of South China (China — Philippines, Vietnam) and East China seas (China – Japan). And here for the first time China is in a weak and, we can say, vulnerable position.
The main content of the world politics of the next decade is the global geopolitical confrontation between China and America [3].
In these circumstances, the role of China (as a participant or regulator of the conflict) and its ability to project "hard" power in world affairs increases.
LITERATURA
1. https://russian.rt.com/science/article/520156-65-let-kitay-oon2. "From the G8 to the "E8": is the Globalization Tide Turning?" AllBusiness. Fall 2016. World Policy Journal. 10 Jan. 2018 .3. https://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-g7.htm
2
Identity is a concept as complex and fuzzy as "society", "culture", "order" and others. Discussions around the definition of identity have been going on for a long time and will continue for a long time.
In the Soviet period, the former Imperial was replaced by an international Soviet identity. Although the Russian Republic existed within the USSR, it did not possess the most important features and attributes of statehood.
The collapse of the Soviet Union had one of its reasons for the awakening of national consciousness of Russians. But as soon as it was born, the new state — the Russian Federation — was faced with a problem: is it the legal successor of the USSR or the Russian Empire? Or is it a completely new state? The dispute over this issue is still ongoing.
The neo-Soviet approach considers the present Russia as "the Soviet Union without ideology" and demands in one form or another to restore the USSR. On the political stage, this worldview is mainly represented by the Communist party of the Russian Federation (Communist party).
Another approach considers Russia as a multinational state within the current borders and as the successor of the Russian Empire and the USSR. There is no need for territorial expansion today, but its own territory, including non-Russian regions, is considered sacred and inseparable. According to this approach, Russia also has pre-emptive interests and even a mission in the territory of the former USSR. Therefore, it should, on the one hand, try to integrate this space in different ways, and on the other, to protect the rights of its compatriots living in the new independent States. This approach is shared by the majority of Russians and proclaimed by President Putin and the United Russia party.
The third approach States that Russia is a Russian state, that the Imperial and Soviet past are equal to the tragic pages of history that need to be closed. Instead, it is desirable to reunite the Russian-populated lands, such as the Crimea, Northern Kazakhstan and others. At the same time, part of the territories, especially the North Caucasus and especially Chechnya, it is better, on the contrary, to give.
The main challenge to the national identity of Russians today should be called the question of the right of immigrants from the labor-surplus republics of the North Caucasus, without losing their language and faith, to move freely to large cities and native Russian regions. Although there are no legal obstacles to this, the process of internal migration causes great tension and leads to the strengthening of Russian nationalist sentiments, including the most extremist ones.
Over the past five centuries, this aspect has been one of the most important. The territory of the Russian Empire, and then the Soviet Union, continuously expanded, which led to the formation of the largest state on Earth, and this feature of Russia has long been the subject of our pride. Any territorial loss is perceived very painfully, so the collapse of the USSR caused a severe trauma to the Russian consciousness from this point of view.
The war in Chechnya demonstrated Russia's readiness to defend this value, regardless of any casualties. And although at some points it defeats the idea of agree with the separation of Chechnya has gained popularity, it is the restoration of Russian control over the Republic became the Foundation of the unprecedented popular support for Putin in early 2000-ies.
The vast majority of Russians believe that the preservation of Russia's territorial integrity and unity is an important element of Russian identity and an important principle that should guide the country [2].
Natural allies, believes a solid majority, Russia does not, and our belonging to European civilization does not mean our common destiny with Western Europe and America. The younger and more educated part of the Russians still gravitate to the European Union and would even like Russia to join it, but it is in the minority. The majority wants to build a Russian democratic state in their own way — and does not expect any help or advice from abroad.
The social ideal of modern Russians can be described as follows. It is an independent and influential, authoritative state in the world. It is an economically highly developed country with a decent standard of living, competitive science and industry. A multinational country where the Russian people play a special, Central role, but the rights of people of all nationalities are respected and protected. It is a country with a strong Central authority, headed by a President with broad powers. It is a country where the law prevails and everyone is equal before it. The country of restored justice in the relations of people with each other and with the state.I would like to note that our social ideal lacks such values as the importance of the alternation of power on an alternative basis; the notion of opposition as the most important institution of the political system; the value of the separation of powers and, especially, their rivalry; the idea of Parliament, parties and representative democracy in General; the value of minority rights and, to a large extent, human rights in General; the value of openness to the world, which is perceived as a source of threats rather than opportunities.
All of the above is the most important challenges to the Russian identity, which the country will have to find an answer to if it wants to achieve national goals — a decent life, public justice and respect for Russia in the world.
Of course, one of the most important elements of Russia's foreign policy is the integration component. The post-Soviet space is a vital region for Russia – over time, the Soviet Union between Russia and the former Soviet republics have strong economic ties, in addition, the preservation of these countries in the zone of influence of the Russian Federation largely solves the problem of ensuring the country's security. The first attempts to reintegrate the republics of the former USSR took place back in the 1990s: initially, the CIS claimed the role of such an integration structure, then there were attempts to create a Customs Union, a Union state of Russia and Belarus, which de jure still operates. Nevertheless, the decisive stage in the formation of the integration bloc took place in the second half of the 2000s, when it was decided to form the Customs Union of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan on the basis of EurAsEC. Further integration passed the stage of the Common economic space in 2015. the Eurasian Economic Union began to operate. To date, Armenia and Kyrgyzstan have joined the Union.
Another important area of Russia's foreign policy is active participation in the development of such organizations as the SCO and BRICS. Interaction with BRICS countries creates a serious alternative to the influence of the West on world politics and reduces the influence of leading Western institutions (the world Bank and the IMF) in the context of the BRICs countries ' creation of The development Bank. Coordination in the BRICS format allows leading non-Western countries to formulate a common position and exchange views on the main issues of the international agenda without the participation and pressure from the United States and other leading Western countries [1].
Cooperation within the SCO allows to take practical steps to counteract three main threats: terrorism, extremism and separatism[8], as well as drug trafficking, mainly in the Central Asian region, strengthens relations between Russia and China, in addition, creates a real alternative to NATO in the region.
Another important part of Russia's foreign policy at the present stage is its policy towards the UN. Russia, which, as the successor of the USSR, inherited the seat of a permanent member of the UN security Council, pursues a policy aimed at maintaining and strengthening the authority of the UN. Russia believes that the UN is currently the only reliable regulator of international relations. The Russian foreign Ministry has repeatedly stressed the danger to international stability posed by "attempts to regulate crises through the use of unilateral sanctions outside the UN security Council and other measures of force, including armed aggression."[9] In this regard, the Russian Federation considers as a threat the use of force bypassing the decisions of the UN security Council, which is demonstrated by the US and other Western countries, in the context of the invasion of Iraq, the bombing of Libya, etc.
To date, the vector of foreign policy of the Russian Federation associated with relations with the US and the EU does not lose relevance. In light of the ongoing Ukrainian crisis, Western sanctions, Russia is interested in building constructive relations with Western partners. Despite the significant pressure exerted by the West on Russia, at the moment it is not in the interests of the Russian Federation to go to a tough confrontation, as the West, especially the EU, continues to be the main economic partner of modern Russia. In this regard, the key is the efforts of Russian diplomacy to establish and strengthen relations with those EU member States that are interested in partnership with Russia. Putin's visit to Hungary and his meeting with Greek Prime Minister tsipras are a perfect illustration of this policy. One of the most important points of building policy with the West today is the Russian diplomatic attempts to resolve the Ukrainian crisis. Negotiations in Minsk and consultations in the Normandy format once again emphasize the high concern of the Russian Federation about the situation in Eastern Ukraine.
Fundamentally new in the Russian foreign policy course was the military air operation of the Russian aerospace forces in Syria, which began in the autumn of 2015. Russia's actions in the middle East demonstrate a new trend towards turning our country into a more active military and political player on the world stage. It is worth noting that such actions in General, fit into the General meaning of the Russian foreign policy doctrine, the key areas which on a global scale are the ideas of combating the disintegration of the Institute of the sovereign nation-state, the confrontation of anarchy and revolutionary change of regimes in different countries, starting with Libya and ending with Ukraine. In this sense, Russia acts as the leader of a conservative direction in world politics, aimed at gradual cautious transformation and does not consider, unlike the Atlanticists, democratization as a guarantor of sustainable development.[3]
Thus, the current foreign policy of the Russian Federation is characterized by multi-vector and the need to respond to various challenges and threats to security and at the same time effectively promote Russia's interests both regionally and globally.
LITERATURE
1. Российская идентичность и вызовы времени. 19 августа 2013https://ria.ru/20130819/957220962.html
2. Shavaev A. Kh. Sushchnost natsionalnoy bezopasnosti i podkhody k ee opredeleniyu[The essence of national security and approaches to its definition]. Voennyy akademicheskiy zhurnal [Military academic journal], 2015, no. 3 (7), pp. 80–87.3. Nitsevich V. F. Geopolitika i natsionalnaya bezopasnost [Geopolitics and national security].
Moscow, Moscow State Regional University Publ., 2009.
3
The topic of this essay is “The concept of “sanctions” in World Politics: international law, Western and Russian interpretation and practice”.
Today, sanctions are a relatively new tool of foreign policy of states and other participants in international relations (for example, international organizations, in some cases individuals). The effectiveness of sanctions, as well as their impact on the economic and political life of both the countries affected and the states that imposed them, remains a matter of debate.The article deals with the application of political and economic sanctions in international relations. The concept of the term "sanction" is revealed, as well as the purposes and their types pursued by the state imposing sanctions. Historical examples of the application of sanctions by individual states are given.
A striking historical example of the application of sanctions, mainly economic, is the Continental blockade against England by Napoleon. On 21 November 1806, Napoleon signed one of the most famous of its decrees. "The British Isles are being declared a blockade from both land and sea, – he said. – All trade and communication with them is prohibited... No vessel coming from England or its colonies... will be accepted in any port."
Napoleon could not simply land on the British Isles, take London and put an end to the greatness of the opponent, due to the fact that the opponent had a dominant force at sea, and usually peculiar to the Emperor military solution to the problem here was difficult. Napoleon had to resort to non-military, bypass the continental blockade, which was to destroy British industry and trade. Thus, England, unable to endure such devastation any longer, would have asked for peace on Napoleon's terms.
In fact, this model has remained broadly unchanged until today. Objects and subjects of economic sanctions are changing, but their purpose is the same as more than two hundred years ago – to force a country with which for any reason it is not possible to fight, to the correct, from the point of view of the organizer of the blockade, behavior by ruinous restrictions in trade [1].
Sanctions are one of the instruments of foreign policy and general security of the state, which pursues the following objectives:
- rights protection,
- maintenance of international peace and strengthening of international security,
- promotion of international cooperation [2, p. 271].
Sanctions are a mechanism in a big political game. History shows that they are introduced not only and not so much for economic reasons. They are introduced in the hope that the deterioration of the economic situation of the country will lead to popular indignation and the overthrow of the undesirable political regime.
Sanctions appear to be an attractive foreign policy tool, because, unlike war, they are designed to resolve international conflicts and disagreements with less cost and human casualties. In particular, therefore, they are used quite often: in the period from 1970 to 1998, for example, sanctions were applied 117 times in the world.
The use of various kinds of sanctions for political purposes can be viewed in terms of their intensity as stages in the ever-increasing political pressure on the partner, and can be considered in accordance with the political objectives that the sanctions are trying to solve. In practice, politicians usually take into account both factors of the impact of sanctions and try to formulate them in such a way as to adequately broadcast the "signal strength" for the opposite party, as well as to concentrate the impact of sanctions either on the direction most vulnerable to the opponent, or on the area of political and economic activity of the target country, which seems to the country's initiator the most outrageous.
The intensity of sanctions is determined by the degree of damage they may cause:
(a) the economy as a whole;
b) political regime or private interests of politicians in power;
C) interests and competitiveness of separate branches of economy and industry;
d) the interests of individual financial and industrial groups, companies, clans.
An example of high-intensity sanctions that threaten a country's economy as a whole is the ban on oil exports for countries whose economy is based on energy exports. An example of sanctions against the interests of specific politicians can be the US sanctions against R. Mugabe and members of his government, or the EU sanctions against high-ranking politicians of Belarus, restrictions on the international diamond trade, imposed to undermine the economic base of the continuation of the civil war in Angola, since it was the sale of precious stones that served as the material main financing for the purchase of weapons by guerrilla movements. An example of sanctions against individual companies is the us sanctions against several Russian defense companies cooperating with Iran.
Trade sanctions occupy a leading place in the arsenal of foreign policy instruments of the leading countries of the world, and in this regard, the following questions deserve special attention: How effective are trade sanctions as a political tool? As expensive trade sanctions for tranienator? What economic and political effect do sanctions have on the target country, and do they force policy changes? Is it possible to get around sanctions? How do countries get out of sanctions, is it necessary for them to make the required policy changes? [1, p. 231].
In functional terms, the application of sanctions may have several purposes. Restricting the exports of the target country weakens its national income and hard currency earnings, thereby reducing its ability to purchase the goods it needs on the world market. Quite often, such measures also contribute to the growth of business profits of the target country, as such sanctions have a similar economic effect with tariff restrictions.
Restrictions on the import of the target country may include a ban on the import of any goods or a ban on the import of only specific goods and raw materials needed for military purposes.
Russia is the largest importer of European agricultural products – animals, meat, dairy products, fruits and vegetables, according to EU data. In total, goods from the EU account for 16% of Russian imports", that is, for Europe, the ban may pose some problem. At the same time, CNN refers to an unnamed representative of the us administration, according to whom "the ban on imports will only exacerbate Russia's international isolation and harm its own economic interests."
Wall Street Journal, published a material in which the retaliatory sanctions are shown as mostly decorative and diplomatic. As for the Russian population, the ban may not play a big role here, since people mainly buy food products of domestic production or products imported from countries that were formerly part of the USSR. Those who are richer and more dependent on imported products are a minority that the Russian government can neglect. The only risk is a surge in inflation, and caution is required. Eastern European farmers may be hit hard by this ban, but it is unlikely to have a major impact on the EU economy as a whole, as the share of agricultural exports to Russia is a very small part of exports in the European bloc.
More gloomy forecasts are offered by Financial Times. "Large-scale import bans can cause serious damage to exporters in Europe and the US, but can also lead to rapid inflation and even a shortage of some products in Russia." Especially strongly it can affect the countries in which the export of agricultural products constitutes a significant portion of national income. In turn, "Russia imports more than 40 percent of food products, and retailers say that it is impossible to quickly switch to domestic sources of products." The consequences of import restrictions, the author concludes, can be very large. "Russia is the largest export market for fruit and vegetables from the EU... and the second largest export market for American industrial poultry farmers."
Financial sanction
Negative consequence. The main problem is the ban on lending to Russian banks and companies in Western banks. This dramatically reduced the access of Russian business to "cheap" money. According to PricewaterhouseCoopers, if in 2013 Russian issuers raised $46.4 billion on the Eurobond market alone, in 2015 — only about $5 billion.In European and American banks, it was advantageous to re-lend, without distracting the interest on old loans fixed assets. As a result, companies could invest them in development. Experts of the Institute of national economic forecasting (INP) RAS in 2015 estimated that "the Russian economy is forced to make up for $160-200 billion of falling borrowed resources." That is, this money should either be sought in Asian banks, which can not be done quickly, or take from their own working capital. As a result, the money that could be spent on business development, often go to pay interest on old loans.
At the same time, the ban on lending to Russian companies affected European bankers. Experts of INP RAS predicted "annual losses of European institutions of $8-10 billion" — it is not received interest on loans not issued. A recent study by the Austrian Institute for economic research (WIFO), published in Der Standard, confirmed these figures even "with an overlap": only in 2015, Europeans missed 17 billion euros of benefit.
Positive effect. Russian business began to look for alternative ways and enter the Asian financial markets, which was often not done simply because of the habit of taking money from "convenient" Western sources.
Russian companies have proven that they can find strategic investors not only in the US and Europe. A good example is the sale of 19.5% of Rosneft shares. Many analysts doubted to the last that in conditions when Western investors are forbidden to invest in Rosneft shares, it will find an investor at all. But the shares were bought by the international consortium Glencore and the sovereign Fund of Qatar
Another positive point: in response to attempts to limit the payments of a number of banks in the Visa and MasterCard systems, the national payment system Mir Was successfully launched in Russia.
Restrictions on exports of equipment and technology
The United States, the EU and a number of other countries banned the supply of military and dual-use goods to Russia, any cooperation of their companies with enterprises of the Russian defense industry, the supply of equipment necessary for the development of oil and gas fields on the Arctic shelf and in shale formations (drilling platforms, horizontal drilling equipment, high-pressure pumps, etc.).
Negative consequence. The most tangible for the Russian defense industry was the cessation of military-technical cooperation with Ukraine.
Meanwhile, the Western economy suffers greatly from the embargo on the supply of equipment. "If we look at the drilling of oil wells and cooperation in this area, there because of the sanctions remain unsold machines and equipment worth several billion euros," - said in an interview Postimees Deputy Secretary General of the European Commission Henrik Hololey.
In addition, if oil production in Russia really falls, it will push up prices and "with the current volumes of oil and gas consumption in the EU, this factor can lead to additional losses of $3 billion a year," - noted in the work of experts of INP RAS.
Thus, the early lifting of sanctions in the energy sector is beneficial to both sides.
Positive effect. Problems with imported, and, above all, Ukrainian components dramatically accelerated the implementation of the program of import substitution in the military sphere. According to Dmitry Rogozin, within the framework of this program in Russia, production is being developed for 186 positions, which were previously produced in Ukraine.
According to the defense Ministry, by the end of 2016, the defense industry of Russia by 70-80% fulfilled the plan for "Ukrainian" import substitution, and 100% this figure will reach in 2018.
Thus, Rybinsk NGO Saturn will start supplying gas turbine engines for warships in late 2017 — early 2018.
Food counter-sanctions from Russia
The essence of sanctions. In 2014, Russia imposed an embargo on supplies to the country for "certain types of agricultural products, raw materials and food, the country of origin of which is the state that decided to impose economic sanctions against Russia." The list includes meat and dairy products, vegetables, fruits, nuts, etc..Negative consequence. At first, the counter-sanctions contributed to the growth of inflation on food products. As a result, this was one of the factors that for the first time in many years in 2014 the country recorded double-digit inflation - 11.4%, and in 2015 it amounted to 12.9%.
The problem of product quality has become a little more acute. Thus, in 2015, the head of the Rosselkhoznadzor Sergey Dankvert reported that the share of adulterated dairy products (using vegetable fats) in Russia was 11%, and among some products - up to 50%.
However, the main negative effect of Russian sanctions had for European farmers. Only in 2015, the export of food products from the EU to Russia decreased by 29%, European producers received less than 2.2 billion euros of profit, 130 thousand jobs were threatened.
Positive effect. "Positive effect (from the introduction of counter-sanctions. - TASS), of course, there is, - says TASS Andrey Danilenko, head of the Committee on agro-industrial policy of the Association "Business Russia". - There are details, nuances, but in General import substitution worked. Today we are one of the largest exporters of grain, we largely provide ourselves with meat and milk".
According to the National meat Association (NMA), Russia's self-sufficiency in poultry meat is now almost 100%, pork — 90%, beef — 65%. The Cabinet, in turn, believe that Russia provides itself with milk by 75%. Danilenko notes that "in terms of milk production costs, Russia is more competitive than the EU, the US and South America," but the industry is very hampered by the high cost of loans.
To date, the impact of food sanctions on inflation has been minimized. At the end of 2016, it was only 5.4%.
The most affected by the sanctions EU countries were Germany, Hungary, Poland, Finland. Ukraine announced the loss of its economy $ 15 billion due to restrictions imposed by Russia. Despite the very sensitive losses, the EU countries can not abandon the anti-Russian sanctions, as they are deprived of the opportunity to pursue an independent economic policy from the United States.
LITERATURE
1.International Sanctions in Theory and Practice. 15 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 273 (2015) Margaret Doxey. https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1806&context=jil2. Барковский А. Н., Алабян С. С., Морозенкова О. В. Последствия западных санкций и ответных санкций РФ // Российский внешнеэкономический вестник. – 2015. – №9. – С. 3-7.
3. Кашпаров Д. В., Смирнова О. С. Экономические последствия санкций ЕС против России и российских контрсанкций // Вопросы экономики и управления. — 2016. — №5.1. — С. 97-99. — URL https://moluch.ru/th/5/archive/44/1596/ (дата обращения: 18.04.2019).