US congressmen have found an alternative to the concept of a "sponsor of terrorism" state for Russia

16
US congressmen have found an alternative to the concept of a "sponsor of terrorism" state for Russia

At the end of November, the deputies of the European Parliament once again curried favor with their overseas curators, deepening the gap in relations between our country and the European Union. With 494 votes, the EP supported a proposed resolution recognizing Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism. As such, the adopted decision does not carry real legal consequences and resembles only behind-the-scenes fuss, with a swing to vigorous legislative activity.

As for the United States, here, naturally, they do not think of deviating from their own course of total discrimination against Russia. Congressmen of both parties did not think long about how to adapt the definition of "aggressor state" in relation to Russia so as not to limit the possibility of diplomatic dialogue.



We are currently working with Congress on legislation that would help us get around some of the problems associated with using state sponsor of terrorism status, which (…) has some unintended consequences

Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said.

According to the The Hill, the US Congress has already found an alternative to recognizing Russia as a sponsor of terrorism. If the law is passed, the president can declare Russia an aggressor state and has the right to “designate any foreign state” as an aggressor state if he considers it “involved in acts of aggression against Ukraine.”

the Biden administration came up with an alternative status that does not even exist in either national or international US law

one of the congressman's aides said.

More recently, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and President Joe Biden personally stated that the United States categorically rejects proposals to recognize Russia as a sponsor of terrorism. However, against the backdrop of Zelensky's today's visit to Washington, a change in political views in the United States is quite predictable. Although it was initially clear that the United States would still find an option that is acceptable to them in this regard, even if this option is not in American law.
  • https://katehon.com/sites/default/files/styles/natural/public/1107486.jpg?itok=wCUM9WlJ
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

16 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +7
    December 21 2022
    So, recognizing a country as a sponsor of terrorism obliges the American leadership to take specific actions against this country, which is why they do not want to recognize Russia as a sponsor of terrorism. Instead, they decided to invent a new status, the assignment of which to someone by the American leadership will not oblige anyone. Well, why not. Let them dance a little for Zelensky, maybe they will like it.
    1. +8
      December 21 2022
      Quote: Plate
      Instead, they decided to invent a new status, the assignment of which to someone by the American leadership will not oblige anyone. Well, why not. Let them dance a little for Zelensky, maybe they will like it.

      In vain you think so. Any status other than friendly will impose various restrictions. Sponsor of terrorism is definitely not suitable. But the aggressor will prohibit something. Or do you think there are complete idiots and saying A will not be able to say B.
      You have already generally confused the boundaries of who should dance for whom. The United States will not do anything for Zelensky and Ukraine, and never did. US interests only. And only Zelensky can dance for Biden, but not vice versa. And no one there will persuade Zelensky, whatever command they give, he will execute that one.
      1. 0
        December 21 2022
        Quote from: topol717
        Or do you think there are complete idiots and saying A will not be able to say B.

        I think very smart people are sitting there, therefore, having said A, they will leave it for the possibility of both saying and not saying B, depending on the situation.
  2. 0
    December 21 2022
    the Biden administration came up with an alternative status that does not even exist in either national or international US law

    They came up with a candy for the greens, dictated to him, he will rush like a written bag and repeat at every corner. And it is empty in real life. And another cool clause - "US international law." It's like "Tsar, v. nice, tsar!"
  3. -2
    December 21 2022
    the Biden administration came up with an alternative status that does not even exist in either national or international US law
    And sho toil then, the Russian Federation is a wolf state. Ukraine is a goat state. request Business then.
  4. +5
    December 21 2022
    there are no more rules so everyone's hands are untied!
  5. 0
    December 21 2022
    I propose that the United States be deprived of the status of "state" and transferred to the status of "territory of savages."
  6. 0
    December 21 2022
    The United States will still find an option that is acceptable to them in this regard, even if this option is not in American law.
    That's for sure. Do not forget to throw straws under you.
    And in the United States, the definition of "American" was not considered politically correct. Now it will be necessary to say "U.S. citizen".
  7. +1
    December 21 2022
    US congressmen have found an alternative to the concept of a "sponsor of terrorism" state for Russia
    the whole world is not going to go crazy, but some part of it, in this state, remains confidently and unconditionally.
  8. +4
    December 21 2022
    With everyone who recognized Russia as a sponsor. .. Break diplomatic relations, or lower their level.
  9. 0
    December 21 2022
    They came up with a good name, apparently they looked in the mirror. So with the light hand of the states, they themselves will eventually stumble over this rake.
    Painfully they messed up a lot, and precisely as an aggressor state both in the military and in the political and economic aspects
  10. 0
    December 21 2022
    They have a precedent right, they will come up with something new and legalize it, write it down in the form of amendments
  11. fiv
    +2
    December 21 2022
    Americans fear for their commercial interests. It's a pity that commercial interests in the Russian Federation also impose restrictions on the desire to punish Ukraine and answer, as they strongly ask, the United States and the European garbage can.
  12. 0
    December 21 2022
    Let them all go! They completely lost their fear.
  13. 0
    December 22 2022
    the evil empire .. now the state is the aggressor .. Everything passes, this too will pass ..
  14. 0
    December 22 2022
    The moderator, the author of the article does not know the grammar of the Russian language! Not "Congressmen of both parties", but "Congressmen of both parties"! The word "party" is feminine!

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"