-
#460
by
Linze
on 29 May, 2014 23:27
-
The embargo changed everything. The trust has been broken..
And the the amazing thing is .. there is no embargo. There is just a tweet from mr. Rogozin, who self-describes himself as "I'm just a bad character" ( in response to Kosmomolskaya Pravda question about his social media presence )
It was not just a tweet. There's also a Russian press interview in which he confirms the embargo.
Rogozin may be a bad character, but he's also Deputy Prime Minister in charge of Russia's defense and space industries. If he says there's an embargo, there's an embargo.
If there were no embargo, the Russians would have denied it. They haven't. The only logical conclusion to be drawn is that an embargo is in place.
-
#461
by
baldusi
on 29 May, 2014 23:32
-
The embargo changed everything. The trust has been broken..
And the the amazing thing is .. there is no embargo. There is just a tweet from mr. Rogozin, who self-describes himself as "I'm just a bad character" ( in response to Kosmomolskaya Pravda question about his social media presence )
It was not just a tweet. There's also a Russian press interview in which he confirms the embargo.
Rogozin may be a bad character, but he's also Deputy Prime Minister in charge of Russia's defense and space industries. If he says there's an embargo, there's an embargo.
If there were no embargo, the Russians would have denied it. They haven't. The only logical conclusion to be drawn is that an embargo is in place.
No it isn't. Part of the agreement of the RD-180, already states that it can't be used for military payloads. Where military is defined as weapons systems, not dual use.
-
#462
by
Linze
on 30 May, 2014 00:14
-
No it isn't. Part of the agreement of the RD-180, already states that it can't be used for military payloads. Where military is defined as weapons systems, not dual use.
Rogozin's statements decisively contradict that agreement. That's the problem. That's why there is an embargo.
-
#463
by
Targeteer
on 30 May, 2014 01:44
-
-
#464
by
jongoff
on 30 May, 2014 02:05
-
No it isn't. Part of the agreement of the RD-180, already states that it can't be used for military payloads. Where military is defined as weapons systems, not dual use.
Rogozin's statements decisively contradict that agreement. That's the problem. That's why there is an embargo.
Somebody should probably tell the RD-AMROSS folks, because they sure haven't been informed of an actual embargo, as opposed to Rogozin shooting off his mouth.
~Jon
-
#465
by
Oli
on 30 May, 2014 04:33
-
The US have no business worth mentioning with Russia except for spaceflight
Well that's not true. Trade volume between the two countries as a % of gdp is relatively small, but its still around $33bn, a lot bigger than spaceflight.
There is no such thing as an invasion of eastern Ukraine.
Haha, LoL, joke of the century. A great part of the separatists in eastern Ukraine are Russian citizens (or newly Chechens), guided by a Russian Colonel (Mr. Strelkov), supplied by Russia. Crimea was taken over by Russian special forces.
Russia has almost no leverage points, but the US has tremendous unused leverage. Were the US to pass sweeping financial sanctions against Russia, their economy would collapse. Even though there is little direct trade, the US is the world's reserve currency. This is why the Iranian sanctions are so damaging. Sweeping US financial sanction would do nearly incalculable damage to Russia.
How is that supposed to work? The financial linkage between the 2 countries is small (reflecting the relatively low importance of trade). Sanctions against Iran are effective because almost everybody participates. The US cannot force the EU or China (Russia's biggest trading partners) to impose sanctions. The US has little (economic) leverage in all this.
-
#466
by
Linze
on 30 May, 2014 04:51
-
How is that supposed to work? The financial linkage between the 2 countries is small (reflecting the relatively low importance of trade). Sanctions against Iran are effective because almost everybody participates. The US cannot force the EU or China (Russia's biggest trading partners) to impose sanctions. The US has little (economic) leverage in all this.
Most of the world's trade is performed in dollars. For example, when Russia trades goods with Japan, most of that trade will be done in USD. Japanese sellers have little desire for rubles, Russian sellers have little desire for Yen. The exchange is performed in USD. It is the same with most of Russia's trading partners.
Were the US to pass sweeping financial sanctions against Russian banks and industry, it would be difficult and expensive for Russian banks and industry to trade with other nations Trade would still be possible, but Russian buyers and sellers would effectively have a tax placed on most of their imports and exports.
Non-Russian banks handling Russian trade would have a choice, Russia or the US. For most banks, the question's not even worth asking. The US economy is the largest in the world.
The Russians would want to pay in Rubles, so the Ruble would lose stability. Many vendors would only accept the Russian currency if there were steep discounts attached. The Russians would lose large a percentage on any exports and pay much higher prices for any imports. The combination would be ruinous for the Russian economy.
The US didn't have this power over the old Soviet command economy, but the current Russian economy is thoroughly interconnected with the West. US financial sanctions could send the modern Russian economy into free-fall.
-
#467
by
Oli
on 31 May, 2014 02:33
-
Most of the world's trade is performed in dollars. For example, when Russia trades goods with Japan, most of that trade will be done in USD. Japanese sellers have little desire for rubles, Russian sellers have little desire for Yen. The exchange is performed in USD. It is the same with most of Russia's trading partners.
I'm pretty sure there is direct ruble/euro, ruble/yen, ruble/renminbi trading. Euro/yen are reserve currencies as well (among others, pound, swiss franc etc.), renminbi is becoming one. I don't see why anyone would not accept trading in them if the dollar is not available.
-
#468
by
Linze
on 31 May, 2014 04:29
-
Most of the world's trade is performed in dollars. For example, when Russia trades goods with Japan, most of that trade will be done in USD. Japanese sellers have little desire for rubles, Russian sellers have little desire for Yen. The exchange is performed in USD. It is the same with most of Russia's trading partners.
I'm pretty sure there is direct ruble/euro, ruble/yen, ruble/renminbi trading. Euro/yen are reserve currencies as well (among others, pound, swiss franc etc.), renminbi is becoming one. I don't see why anyone would not accept trading in them if the dollar is not available.
There is, but rarely in the quantities needed by major industries. When a shipload of ore is purchased, the currency needs to be exchanged that day. Few currency traders will be able to make massive Yen to Ruble conversions at a moment's notice.
So it's Yen to USD, then USD to Rubles. The currency traders take a small slice, which is why US based businesses have it so easy. They can trade with everyone, everywhere using their own currency.
-
#469
by
baldusi
on 31 May, 2014 04:55
-
Actually, that's changing. The Bretton-Woods inertia kept going. But there have been significant bilateral agreements and anything to Euro is direct. And China has arranged for bilateral exchange to Euro, Rubles and. Yens, at least.
-
#470
by
Linze
on 31 May, 2014 04:59
-
Actually, that's changing. The Bretton-Woods inertia kept going. But there have been significant bilateral agreements and anything to Euro is direct. And China has arranged for bilateral exchange to Euro, Rubles and. Yens, at least.
Yes, it's slowly changing, but hasn't changed yet. USD is likely to remain the currency of choice for a great many nations.
The US still has tremendous power in this regard.
-
#471
by
anonymous
on 31 May, 2014 10:56
-
This discussion about the dollar as reserve currency is dangerously off topic, inviting the mods to lock it, but the reason why sanctions against Iran have been so successful is not because of that or because of universal application of UN sanctions (don't make me laugh), but because the US sanctioned any bank dealing with Iran. Banks were forced to choose between the US or Iran. They chose the US because it has a far bigger economy and accounts for far more international trade. It would be much the same if the US imposed financial sanctions on Russia. Please can we go back on topic now?
-
#472
by
Oli
on 31 May, 2014 13:30
-
There is, but rarely in the quantities needed by major industries. When a shipload of ore is purchased, the currency needs to be exchanged that day. Few currency traders will be able to make massive Yen to Ruble conversions at a moment's notice.
So it's Yen to USD, then USD to Rubles. The currency traders take a small slice, which is why US based businesses have it so easy. They can trade with everyone, everywhere using their own currency.
Again, I don't see why not more Yen/Rubles could be traded when demand is there. The US has traditionally been the most important reserve currency since WW2 (the US won the war and the rest was in ruins), but if there are too many restrictions on trading with dollars, other currencies will be used. I don't see how US businesses having it easier than others btw.
Banks were forced to choose between the US or Iran. They chose the US because it has a far bigger economy and accounts for far more international trade. It would be much the same if the US imposed financial sanctions on Russia.
No it would not be the same. Iran is too unimportant and sanctions were backed by western and other powers. If the US were to sanction European or Chinese companies for doing business with Russia, that would basically result in a trade war with both entities. The US won't do that.
Mods can delete the whole debate if they want.
-
#473
by
Linze
on 31 May, 2014 22:39
-
the reason why sanctions against Iran have been so successful is.. because the US sanctioned any bank dealing with Iran. Banks were forced to choose between the US or Iran. They chose the US because it has a far bigger economy and accounts for far more international trade. It would be much the same if the US imposed financial sanctions on Russia.
Absolutely correct.
No it would not be the same. Iran is too unimportant and sanctions were backed by western and other powers. If the US were to sanction European or Chinese companies for doing business with Russia, that would basically result in a trade war with both entities. The US won't do that.
If Russia expands its invasion of Ukraine's eastern provinces, banking sanctions are among the next steps. The US and EU won't declare military war, they may declare economic war.
The US has over 8 times the GDP of Russia. The EU's GDP is about the same size as the US. If forced to chose, all the large nations will go with the US and EU. Together, they're 16 times the size of Russia's economy, add the rest of the G7 and it hits a multiple of 20.
China? China's number 1 export market by a large margin is the US. Their 2nd largest export market is the EU. If forced to choose between Russia and the US/EU, there would be no choice. Were China to side with Russia, the Chinese economy would collapse.
The US has massive leverage over the Russians. It's not even up for dispute. It is an unassailable fact.
-
#474
by
Lar
on 01 Jun, 2014 01:47
-
No more about Bretton Woods, which currencies are Reserve or boycott strategies.
-
#475
by
edkyle99
on 10 Jun, 2014 18:14
-
Almost a month now since Dmitry Rogozin threatened an RD-180 cut off, yet ULA officials continue to say that they've received no word
whatsoever about any such thing.
https://twitter.com/Gruss_SN/status/476056012244660225When is the next RD-180 delivery? Later this year?
- Ed Kyle
-
#476
by
baldusi
on 10 Jun, 2014 19:42
-
Almost a month now since Dmitry Rogozin threatened an RD-180 cut off, yet ULA officials continue to say that they've received no word whatsoever about any such thing.
https://twitter.com/Gruss_SN/status/476056012244660225
When is the next RD-180 delivery? Later this year?
- Ed Kyle
Somehow I remember October. I believe they generally got each batch in April, but because of all this they've asked to do it twice per year starting this October. But that's what I think I remember, the truth might be quite different.
-
#477
by
DGH
on 11 Jun, 2014 00:30
-
-
#478
by
Sean Lynch
on 11 Jun, 2014 11:22
-
w/r to military launches using RD-180, has it been confirmed that Russian Engineers are required to prep an RD-180 for launch?
I found a comment to that effect on
spacepolitics and recall seeing similar statements here on NSF somewhere- but I can't recall the topic.
I'm curious if Russia has any meaningful control of the use of the engines once in the US.
There is a an issue of being ethically bound to keep procurement agreements we may have made which restrict the use of the RD-180 to non military purposes. If such an agreement was made, how did the RD-180 wind up in a USAF EELV?
-
#479
by
AnalogMan
on 11 Jun, 2014 13:12
-
w/r to military launches using RD-180, has it been confirmed that Russian Engineers are required to prep an RD-180 for launch?
I found a comment to that effect on spacepolitics and recall seeing similar statements here on NSF somewhere- but I can't recall the topic.
I'm curious if Russia has any meaningful control of the use of the engines once in the US.
[...]
Jongoff provided an answer to this in the
Atlas V and Centaur Q&A thread
Among reciprocal Russian sanctions, defined by Rogozin one is not discussed in policy topics, while potentially have serious and nearly immediate consequences.
When he speak about restrictions for Russian engines for military-related launches of American rockets, he add that not only selling could be prohibited, but the technical maintenance by Russian servicemen of any engine already bought (and already on American soil) could be prohibited too.
So my questions are:
* Does RD-180 and/or AJ26/NK-33 have parts that currently should be periodically/before installation in rocket/before start serviced by production plant personnel (NPO Energomash or Kuznetsov DB)?
* If so, could RD Amross / Aerojet do such maintenance independently (both from technological and legal points of view)?
* If not, are ULA / Orbital really have "more than 2 year's reserves of engines" or they have "unserviceable and therefore useless junk" instead?
PS. I am write question here, because policy forum is read only for me.
Prof,
Since nobody answered your question here, I figured I'd answer. I spoke with someone from RD-AMROSS at the Space Symposium last month, and specifically asked him about this. Apparently once the engines are delivered to the US, Russian involvement is only on an observation basis. The RD-AMROSS folks have a few Russians there at a few key points in the process, but all of the work is done by the US personnel. So this isn't really a legit concern.
~Jon