Democrats herald agreement on sweeping Russia sanctions bill

http://www.ajc.com/news/democrats-h...russia-sanctions-bill/q2VRzLgEJWyVPO8vXWS5NK/

Democrats herald agreement on sweeping Russia sanctions bill

Associated Press
12:52 p.m Saturday, July 22, 2017

WASHINGTON


Congressional Democrats announced Saturday that a bipartisan group of House and Senate negotiators have reached an agreement on a sweeping Russia sanctions package to punish Moscow for meddling in the presidential election and its military aggression in Ukraine and Syria.

Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the No. 2 House Democrat, said lawmakers had settled lingering issues with the bill, which also includes stiff economic penalties against Iran and North Korea. The sanctions targeting Russia, however, have drawn the most attention due to President Donald Trump's persistent push for warmer relations with President Vladimir Putin and ongoing investigations into Russia's interference in the 2016 campaign.

Passage of the bill, which could occur before Congress breaks for the August recess, puts Congress on possible collision course with Trump. The White House had objected to a key section of the bill that would mandate a congressional review if Trump attempted to ease or end the sanctions against Moscow. But if Trump were to veto the bill, he risks sparking an outcry from Republicans and Democrats and having his decision overturned. The sanctions review was included in the bill because of wariness among lawmakers from both parties over Trump's affinity for Putin.

The precise mechanics of how involved House Democrats would be in the review process had been a key sticking point, but Hoyer said he was pleased with the outcome.

"The legislation ensures that both the majority and minority are able to exercise our oversight role over the administration's implementation of sanctions," Hoyer said.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called the sanctions legislation "strong" and he expected the legislation to be passed promptly.

"Given the many transgressions of Russia, and President Trump's seeming inability to deal with them, a strong sanctions bill such as the one Democrats and Republicans have just agreed to is essential," said Schumer, D-N.Y.

Early Saturday morning, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy posted a legislative business schedule that shows the sanctions bill will be considered Tuesday. McCarthy had pushed to add the North Korea sanctions to the package. The House had overwhelmingly passed legislation in May to hit Pyongyang with additional economic sanctions, but the Senate had yet to take up the bill.

The Senate last month passed sanctions legislation that targeted only Russia and Iran. Congressional aides said there may be resistance among Senate Republicans to adding the North Korea penalties, but it remained unclear whether those concerns would further stall the legislation. The aides were not authorized to speak publicly and requested anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

"A nearly united Congress is poised to send President Putin a clear message on behalf of the American people and our allies, and we need President Trump to help us deliver that message," said Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland, the top ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee.

The House and Senate negotiators addressed concerns voiced by American oil and natural gas companies that sanctions specific to Russia's energy sector could backfire on them to Moscow's benefit. The bill raises the threshold for when U.S. firms would be prohibited from being part of energy projects that also included Russian businesses.

Although there is widespread support for the legislation, the bill stalled after it cleared the Senate over constitutional questions and bickering over technical details. In particular, House Democrats charged that GOP leaders had cut them out of the congressional review that would be triggered if Trump proposed to terminate or suspend the Russia sanctions. But Republicans rejected the complaint and blamed Democrats for holding the bill up.

The review requirement in the sanctions bill is styled after 2015 legislation pushed by Republicans and approved in the Senate that gave Congress a vote on whether then-President Barack Obama could lift sanctions against Iran. That measure reflected Republican complaints that Obama had overstepped the power of the presidency and needed to be checked by Congress.

According to the bill, Trump is required to send Congress a report explaining why he wants to suspend or terminate a particular set of sanctions. Lawmakers would then have 30 days to decide whether to allow the move or reject it.

The North Korea sanctions bill included in the package bill cleared the House by a 419-1 vote and House Republicans became frustrated the Senate didn't move quickly on the measure given the vast bipartisan support it received. The measure bars ships owned by North Korea or by countries that refuse to comply with U.N. resolutions against it from operating in American waters or docking at U.S. ports. Goods produced by North Korea's forced labor would be prohibited from entering the United States.

The sanctions package imposes mandatory penalties on people involved in Iran's ballistic missile program and anyone who does business with them. The measure would apply terrorism sanctions to the country's Revolutionary Guards and enforce an arms embargo.
 
Congress gives a big

upload_2017-7-22_14-15-55.gif




To Donald Trump :D
 
EUROPE BALKS AT RUSSIA SANCTIONS; TRUMP WON’T VETO THEM

President Trump has decided not to veto the Russia sanctions legislation passed by Congress. The decision was probably an easy one inasmuch as (1) a veto would easily have been overridden, resulting in embarrassment for the president and (2) it would have added fuel to Trump-Russia connection stories.

Naturally, Russia is angry about the sanctions. Europe is also unhappy, which is ironic because some European leaders have criticized Trump for being soft on Russia.

Let’s start with Russia. The Kremlin has announced that, in response to the sanctions, it will expel U.S. diplomats. The U.S. will have to reduce its diplomatic and technical staff in Russia to 455 people. In addition, U.S. personnel no longer will be able to use a posh dacha for parties and vacations.

These actions are, at best, symbolic. I doubt that we need 455 diplomats and technicians in Russia and the dacha, though I’m sure it’s nice, is surplus to requirements.

The Washington Post reports that, in addition to the response just discussed, Russia is likely to become less cooperative with the U.S. in matters such as Syria, North Korea, and combating terrorism. This concern seems overblown.

We can expect the Russians to continue to cooperate with us when it’s in their interest to do so. For example, it was in Russia’s interest to reach a deal whereby the U.S. abandoned Syria fighters opposed to Russian interests in exchange for a cease fire that was also in its interest, and which it could break the moment that ceased to be the case. This is the kind of deal Russia will agree to, sanctions or not. Similarly, Putin will not agree to deals that don’t advance Russian interests, sanctions or not.

The Post’s article does not discuss the most serious potential consequence of the U.S. sanctions — their implications for Europe. The sanctions allow the U.S. to impose heavy fines on European companies involved in energy infrastructure with Russia. They thus threaten several major projects now in progress.

As Noah Daponte-Smith at NRO says:

The Continent has long been dependent on Russian oil and gas, and potential stoppages in the westward flow of Russian oil have long caused headaches in European capitals — a 2009 dispute between Russia and Ukraine, for instance, caused serious crises in much of southeastern Europe, which relies heavily on Russian gas, and touched even central and western Europe.

Of particular concern is the proposed Nord Stream 2 pipeline, a project, controversial within Europe, that would traverse the Baltic Sea on the way from Russia to Germany. The project would be led by Gazprom, which is owned predominantly by the Russian government, and thus within the scope of the new sanctions.

EC Commission chief Klaus Juncker recently warned:

The U.S. bill could have unintended unilateral effects that impact the EU’s energy security interests. If our concerns are not taken into account sufficiently, we stand ready to act appropriately within a matter of days. ‘America First’ cannot mean that Europe’s interests come last.

What actions might Europe deem “appropriate?” Daponte-Smith cites the possibility of the same sort of trade-war retaliation that Trump has publicly considered since the beginning of his administration. Alternatively, Europe might invoke its law to prevent the enforcement of U.S. law extra-territorially. A general diplomatic rift between the EU and the U.S. is another possibility.

The benefit to Russia of these scenarios seems to outweigh the pain our sanctions undoubtedly would inflict on Russia. Thus, Daponte-Smith argues that we should craft the application of our sanctions around European interests as the Europeans perceive them.

The Trump administration should be able to accomplish this. However, efforts to do so will lead to charges from the president’s enemies that he is soft on, or even “colluding” with, Russia.

Republicans ought not join that chorus. The president needs some flexibility. His conduct regarding Russia has caused him to lose a considerable amount of the flexibility a president should normally enjoy in dealing with a foreign adversary. However, with America’s relations with Europe on the line, it’s important that Trump retain sufficient flexibility to accommodate European concerns regarding the sanctions Congress has passed.

Otherwise, Russia will be the winner.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archiv...-at-russia-sanctions-trump-wont-veto-them.php
 
Back
Top