Paper thrown off, it's time to attack!
Strange as it may sound, we nevertheless waited for that bright day when Russia almost ceased to keep its savings in American treasuries. According to the US Treasury, at the moment the Central Bank of Russia holds in these securities less than 15 billions of US dollars, which is an “anti-record” from the year 2007.
The peak of sales fell in April-May of this year, when the volume of our investments in the US national debt decreased by a total of 6,5. And this, by the way, is a kind of “world record” - before that, no country could boast of such a pace of sales of American assets.
There are no visible economic reasons for such behavior of the Russian Central Bank: the dollar is firmly on its feet and even strengthens a little. This means that the reasons may lie either in the political or in the domestic economic situation in Russia.
First of all, let us calm down and stop thinking that the Russian government has become smarter and has found a way to make this money work inside and for the good of Russia. Alas, as it turned out, the withdrawn funds almost did not reach Moscow: 47 billions were deposited in foreign banks, 25,2 billion were in the accounts of foreign securities, the IMF and the Bank for International Settlements, and much of the remaining money was transferred to the assets and liabilities of others ( not US) states.
It turns out that the actions of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation are clearly dictated by non-economic reasons. About the sudden insight it probably is not. So, one thing remains - politics.
Many experts attribute the decisive steps of Moscow to the risk of seizing our assets. And, as practice shows, this option cannot be completely ruled out: relatively recently, the funds of the national sovereign fund of the Republic of Kazakhstan were arrested, not even for political reasons, but as a result of a commercial dispute between the government of Kazakhstan and some Moldovan entrepreneur. And 22 billion dollars fell under arrest, which, given the proportional size of the economies, is even greater than the number of treasuries in Russia.
It’s probably pointless to argue with such estimates: after all, they can really freeze, and no our self-hypnosis in the spirit of “they will undermine the credibility of their financial system” will help. But there is one important nuance - you can freeze assets in foreign banks.
The precedent of such a freeze also exists - Iran. At one time, with the filing of Americans in foreign banks, it was frozen, according to various estimates, from 100 to 130 billions of dollars belonging to Iran. Moreover, a significant part of these funds is in the banks of China, and, despite the strong ties between the two states, Tehran is still unable to pull them out.
This is due to the fact that the arrest of funds was carried out as a result of sanctions announced by the UN. And even China is still unable to lift these restrictions without already exposing its financial system to the risk of imposing some kind of unilateral sanctions from the US and its satellites.
Perhaps the Kremlin is looking more calmly at such a perspective, since it has the right to “veto” in the UN Security Council, and it simply will not allow any resolutions against its own interests.
And yet it is alarming: Americans can twist the arms of almost everyone except China, and Beijing is under such pressure that it is almost impossible to predict its response to American threats.
We can also assume that the rapid withdrawal of the Russian Federation from US assets is the preparation of Moscow for some political steps that will certainly go against US interests. That is, this is a work in advance, designed to minimize the consequences for Russia of any sharp political (or even military) steps of the Kremlin.
Two directions seem most obvious here: Donbass and Syria.
Moscow’s actions in the Ukrainian direction are difficult to predict - it’s too painful a knot. But it can be assumed that the injection of the referendum in the Donbass was made for a reason, and if it is not possible to agree on this with the "partners", Moscow can take certain independent steps.
In Syria, the issue of restoring the country is very acute. And it is clear that doing it without Syrian oil will be quite expensive. In turn, almost all of Syria’s oil fields were under the control of pro-American Kurdish formations. And somehow it turns out that a strike to the northeast of Damascus now seems almost inevitable, let only the south clean up properly.
Can a sharp escalation of the situation in northeastern Syria be a reason for strengthening anti-Russian sanctions? Yes, of course: the reasons are compelling, and the reason for the next tantrum is very good. And if so, then we will not discount this option.
But do not forget that all this can be a big bluff and part of the diplomatic game. We warn the Americans that there was one less trump card in their deck, and we are a little better prepared to continue the game. And it doesn’t even matter what exactly we will go for, the main thing is that in the ongoing military-political poker, we have long been an empty hand. And this can actually affect the negotiating positions of the United States: when there is no desire for war, but with talk and sanctions alone, victory cannot be won, inevitably we have to look for options for a peaceful existence.
This version is also supported by the fact that recently test clips of the latest Russian weapons appeared on the network. And this, whatever one may say, is also a signal. We crash, says Shoigu. And we will not allow money to be stolen, Nabiullina adds shyly.
Coincidence? Dmitry Kiselev does not think so ...
The peak of sales fell in April-May of this year, when the volume of our investments in the US national debt decreased by a total of 6,5. And this, by the way, is a kind of “world record” - before that, no country could boast of such a pace of sales of American assets.
There are no visible economic reasons for such behavior of the Russian Central Bank: the dollar is firmly on its feet and even strengthens a little. This means that the reasons may lie either in the political or in the domestic economic situation in Russia.
First of all, let us calm down and stop thinking that the Russian government has become smarter and has found a way to make this money work inside and for the good of Russia. Alas, as it turned out, the withdrawn funds almost did not reach Moscow: 47 billions were deposited in foreign banks, 25,2 billion were in the accounts of foreign securities, the IMF and the Bank for International Settlements, and much of the remaining money was transferred to the assets and liabilities of others ( not US) states.
It turns out that the actions of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation are clearly dictated by non-economic reasons. About the sudden insight it probably is not. So, one thing remains - politics.
Many experts attribute the decisive steps of Moscow to the risk of seizing our assets. And, as practice shows, this option cannot be completely ruled out: relatively recently, the funds of the national sovereign fund of the Republic of Kazakhstan were arrested, not even for political reasons, but as a result of a commercial dispute between the government of Kazakhstan and some Moldovan entrepreneur. And 22 billion dollars fell under arrest, which, given the proportional size of the economies, is even greater than the number of treasuries in Russia.
It’s probably pointless to argue with such estimates: after all, they can really freeze, and no our self-hypnosis in the spirit of “they will undermine the credibility of their financial system” will help. But there is one important nuance - you can freeze assets in foreign banks.
The precedent of such a freeze also exists - Iran. At one time, with the filing of Americans in foreign banks, it was frozen, according to various estimates, from 100 to 130 billions of dollars belonging to Iran. Moreover, a significant part of these funds is in the banks of China, and, despite the strong ties between the two states, Tehran is still unable to pull them out.
This is due to the fact that the arrest of funds was carried out as a result of sanctions announced by the UN. And even China is still unable to lift these restrictions without already exposing its financial system to the risk of imposing some kind of unilateral sanctions from the US and its satellites.
Perhaps the Kremlin is looking more calmly at such a perspective, since it has the right to “veto” in the UN Security Council, and it simply will not allow any resolutions against its own interests.
And yet it is alarming: Americans can twist the arms of almost everyone except China, and Beijing is under such pressure that it is almost impossible to predict its response to American threats.
We can also assume that the rapid withdrawal of the Russian Federation from US assets is the preparation of Moscow for some political steps that will certainly go against US interests. That is, this is a work in advance, designed to minimize the consequences for Russia of any sharp political (or even military) steps of the Kremlin.
Two directions seem most obvious here: Donbass and Syria.
Moscow’s actions in the Ukrainian direction are difficult to predict - it’s too painful a knot. But it can be assumed that the injection of the referendum in the Donbass was made for a reason, and if it is not possible to agree on this with the "partners", Moscow can take certain independent steps.
In Syria, the issue of restoring the country is very acute. And it is clear that doing it without Syrian oil will be quite expensive. In turn, almost all of Syria’s oil fields were under the control of pro-American Kurdish formations. And somehow it turns out that a strike to the northeast of Damascus now seems almost inevitable, let only the south clean up properly.
Can a sharp escalation of the situation in northeastern Syria be a reason for strengthening anti-Russian sanctions? Yes, of course: the reasons are compelling, and the reason for the next tantrum is very good. And if so, then we will not discount this option.
But do not forget that all this can be a big bluff and part of the diplomatic game. We warn the Americans that there was one less trump card in their deck, and we are a little better prepared to continue the game. And it doesn’t even matter what exactly we will go for, the main thing is that in the ongoing military-political poker, we have long been an empty hand. And this can actually affect the negotiating positions of the United States: when there is no desire for war, but with talk and sanctions alone, victory cannot be won, inevitably we have to look for options for a peaceful existence.
This version is also supported by the fact that recently test clips of the latest Russian weapons appeared on the network. And this, whatever one may say, is also a signal. We crash, says Shoigu. And we will not allow money to be stolen, Nabiullina adds shyly.
Coincidence? Dmitry Kiselev does not think so ...
Information