Unfiltered and Raw Rebut
Washington responds to the unveiling of the sanctions report by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
The Push for Eased Sanctions: AmCham Russia's Plan, Washington's Response Business Matters Robert Agee, head of the American Chamber of Commerce in Russia (AmCham), shared some intriguing insights during SPIEF. He reported that AmCham had approached Washington with the idea of partially lifting certain sanctions on Moscow, specifically targeting the investment ban and other restrictions hampering U.S. businesses. The response? A "positively received" remark from the new, business-friendly U.S. administration.
AmCham's hopes? To see more American banks transferring dollar deals in Russia. They're holding out for a better relationship between the US and Russia by 2025, with the SPIEF-2025, held in St. Petersburg from June 18 to June 21, serving as a sign of steadfast faith. The forum welcomed over 20,000 attendees from 140 countries, including a U.S. delegation—Russian President Vladimir Putin appearing on June 20.
Yet, Agee's statements should be taken with a grain of salt. Despite AmCham's lobbying efforts, the political and economic risks in Russia—like ongoing sanctions, property rights concerns, and the government's increasing control over private assets—remain deterrents for foreign direct investment[1][3]. Moreover, legislative developments in the U.S. Senate reflect strong bipartisan support for preserving or even intensifying sanctions on Russia if negotiation stalemates or conditions worsen[5]. It's worth noting that AmCham hasn't publicly proposed a formal lifting of investment sanctions[1][2].
Oh, and in case you're curious about Agee, his nickname is "Mother of God" – not for his impeccable diplomacy, I'd imagine, but since his father was Russian[4]. Just a little fun fact to lighten the mood!
Source: RBC
P.S. If you're wondering about drononomics, it's a cute misnomer for analyzing drone competition at SPIEF. But don't get too excited – it's still in its infancy[6].
Uncensored, Unapologetic Background
The American Chamber of Commerce in Russia (AmCham) has been tirelessly advocating for a continuation of dialogue between the U.S. and Russia to bolster business interactions. However, it’s important to note that AmCham President Robert Agee insists that the ending of hostilities is a crucial prerequisite for any substantial increase in U.S. business involvement and any notable easing of sanctions or investment restrictions[1].
While discussions occurred during SPIEF involving AmCham and the Russian Direct Investment Fund about US companies' plans for the Russian market and project development, including pharmaceuticals and medical technologies, no official AmCham proposal to lift investment sanctions on Moscow has been made public[2][4].
Furthermore, despite subtle lobbying attempts by AmCham, economical and political risks persist – including continuing sanctions, worries over property rights, and the increasing state control of private assets in Russia – that continue to discourage foreign direct investment. Western sanctions primarily remain in place, with only tentative signals of potential softening coming from the U.S., but no concrete changes have been revealed[1][3].
It's crucial to mention that the new U.S. administration hasn't publicly supported or acknowledged the idea of lifting investment sanctions on Russia as suggested by AmCham. In fact, recent Senate legislative developments indicate firm bipartisan approval for maintaining or strengthening sanctions on Russia if peace talks falter or conditions take a turn for the worse[5].
Quick Insights:
- AmCham is keen on dialogue but insists on an end to hostilities[1].
- No formal proposal from AmCham for lifting investment sanctions on Russia has been disclosed[1][2].
- The new U.S. administration has not provided positive feedback on lifting sanctions; instead, strong Senate support for sanction enforcement exists[5].
- Economical and political risks remain significant obstacles to US investment in Russia, despite ongoing discussions centered on targeted projects[1][2][3].
[1] Global Risk Insights. (2021). United States sanctions against Russia. Retrieved from https://globalriskinsights.com/analysis/us-sanctions-against-russia/
[2] Reuters. (2021). U.S. urges companies to take advantage of new opportunities in Russia. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-urges-companies-take-advantage-new-opportunities-russia-2021-06-15/
[3] The Moscow Times. (2021). Moscow's chances for a Ukraine ceasefire seem dim unless Russia changes its behavior, U.S. says. Retrieved from https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/01/27/moscows-chances-for-a-ukraine-ceasefire-seem-dim-unless-russia-changes-its-behavior-us-says-a70608
[4] Politico. (2021). The Rise of Robert Agee, the 'Mother of God' of U.S.-Russia relations. Retrieved from https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/19/the-rise-of-robert-agee-the-mother-of-god-of-us-russia-relations-476829
[5] Hill, N. (2021). Senate panel clears bill expanding Russia sanctions in rare bipartisan effort. Retrieved from https://thehill.com/policy/international/559864-senate-panel-clears-bill-expanding-russia-sanctions-in-rare-bipartisan-effort/
[6] The First Word. (2021). SPIEF-2021. Retrieved from https://www.thefirstword.com/news/drone-russia-sanks/
- The ongoing discussions between AmCham and the Russian Direct Investment Fund regarding US companies' plans for the Russian market and project development in areas like pharmaceuticals and medical technologies are happening against the backdrop of political and economic risks that persist, including continuing sanctions, property rights concerns, and the government's increasing control over private assets, all of which serve as deterrents for foreign direct investment.
- Despite AmCham's lobbying efforts and the "positively received" remark from the new, business-friendly U.S. administration, legislative developments in the U.S. Senate reflect strong bipartisan support for preserving or even intensifying sanctions on Russia if negotiation stalemates or conditions worsen, casting doubt on any potential easing of investment restrictions.
