49 Countries Have Violated Sanctions On North Korea

A new report from the Institute for Science and International Security has found that 49 countries violated sanctions on North Korea to varying degrees between March 2014 and September 2017.

You will find more statistics at Statista

13 governments including Cuba, Egypt, Iran and Syria were involved in military violations, which as Statista"s Martin Armstrong notes, includes either receiving military training from North Korea or being involved in the import and export of military equipment.

The range of nations involved in breaching non-military sanctions is much broader.

Those violations include importing and exporting sanctioned goods and minerals or aiding shipments by re-flagging vessels. Other instances include the involvement of front companies as well as other business activities like financial transactions. The list of nations violating sanctions non-militarily includes China, France, Germany and Japan.

13 other countries violated sanctions in a manner that seems completely inadvertent.

North Korea targeted countries including the Canada, Switzerland and the U.S. in an attempt to buy equipment which could potentially have military applications. This strategy has proven successful in the past, with the most famous example occurring in the 1980s when Pyongyang duped U.S. aerospace manufacturer McDonnell Douglas in order to illegally obtain 87 civilian MD-500 helicopters. The North Korean military later modified them to carry Susong-Po anti-tank missiles and these aircraft are still in active service today.

China Slams "Wrong" US Sanctions Against North Korea-Linked Trading Firms

A day after China’s state-run airline closed its last remaining routes to North Korea – a decision the airline’s executives blamed on a sharp decline in business travelers due to restrictive UN Security Council sanctions – Communist Party spokespeople slammed new US sanctions targeting Chinese traders doing business with North Korean businessmen, calling them “wrong” while reminding the US that China has vigorously enforced the UN sanctions.

After announcing that the US would once again designate North Korea a state sponsor of terrorism due to its missile and nuclear tests and its trading in illegal arms with terrorist groups and unsavory governments, President Donald Trump revealed that the Treasury Department would be rolling out new sanctions over the next two weeks, the US’s latest volley in a "maximum pressure campaign" against Kim Jong-Un"s regime, AFP reported.

ABC Breaking News | Latest News Videos

As had been expected, the US Treasury Department announced on Tuesday that the list of North Korean and Chinese companies targeted by existing US sanctions has been expanded. It was this decision that angered the Chinese.

Only last week, Trump returned to the US from a five-nation tour of Asia with assurances from Chinese President Xi Jinping that China, the North’s primary benefactor which is responsible for 90% of its trade, would do more to economically pressure its restive neighbor.

 

Treasury sanctions trading, labor, and shipping companies and vessels
to further isolate North Korea and disrupt illicit funding of its unlawful nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Targets include one individual, 13 entities, and 20 vessels: https://t.co/CT9hMx3d6p

— Treasury Department (@USTreasury) November 21, 2017

 

The Treasury has added to a list of 10 Chinese companies believed to be doing business with the North in violation of international sanctions.

In response, a Chinese spokesman reiterated that China rejects unilateral sanctions against its companies and North Korea, saying these issues should be worked out through the Security Council.

"We consistently oppose any country adopting unilateral sanctions based on its own domestic laws and regulations and the wrong method of exercising long-arm jurisdiction," foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang told a regular news briefing.

The sanctions are a sign that, despite Xi’s assurances, many doubts remain about China’s efforts to contain the North’s nuclear ambitions.

The spokesman called on Washington to provide "any solid evidence" that Chinese companies have violated the UN sanctions, according to AFP.

 

He added that if any companies or individuals have violated domestic laws, "we will severely deal with that in accordance with our laws and regulations".

While China has backed the Security Council sanctions – which it easily could’ve blocked with a veto – the country has been reluctant to take the more drastic step of cutting off oil supplies through a pipeline to North Korea"s lone refinery, fearing that regime collapse could lead to a flood of refugees and chaos on the China-North Korea border.

Still, US authorities believe some Chinese banks and trading firms continue to do business with the North in defiance of UN sanctions, US threats of unilateral action and warnings from the Chinese government.

Since the verbal standoff between Kim Jong Un and President Donald Trump began shortly after the latter’s inauguration, China has pressed for dialogue between the two countries, saying this week that "more should be done" to hold talks to resolve the crisis. Specifically, both Beijing and Moscow have pushed for a "dual track approach" which would see the US freeze its military drills in South Korea while North Korea would halt its weapons programs. Ultimately, the Chinese hope the US will remove its THAAD missile defense systems from South Korea, since the Chinese see the purportedly defensive systems as a potential offensive threat.

A Chinese special envoy also wrapped up a four-day trip to the North on Monday, during which the two sides discussed regional concerns but made no direct statements about the nuclear standoff.

US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said the sanctions would not only increase Pyongyang"s isolation but also expose "its evasive tactics."

"These designations include companies that have engaged in trade with North Korea cumulatively worth hundreds of millions of dollars," Mnuchin said.

 

"We are also sanctioning the shipping and transportation companies, and their vessels, that facilitate North Korea"s trade and its deceptive maneuvers."

In all, the new measures add one individual, 13 trading entities and 20 ships to US sanctions lists.

Any property or assets of the firms involved found to be in areas under US jurisdiction are to be frozen, and Americans are banned from trading with them. Three Chinese firms - Dandong Kehua Economy and Trade, Dandong Xianghe Trading Company and Dandong Hongda Trade - are said to have sold computers, minerals and ore to North Korea. Chinese businessman Sun Sidong and his company Dandong Dongyuan Industrial are accused of exporting vehicles, machinery, radio navigation and "items associated with nuclear reactors.” A woman who answered the phone at the company said it was not doing business with North Korea and suggested that the firm had halted its operations.

"We are not operating," she said.

Another woman at Dandong Kehua Economy and Trade denied knowing about the sanctions.

"We have temporarily suspended (trading)," she said.

In a surprise move, in addition to slapping sanctions on firms and North Korean ships, the Treasury added the Korea South-South Cooperation Corporation to its sanctions list. The firm is alleged to have sent North Korean guest workers to China, Russia, Cambodia and Poland. Foreign workers are a major source of income to the regime. Trump has repeatedly exhorted the US’s allies to expel North Korean guest workers, whose remittances provide a vital source of foreign currency to the regime.

Ironically, the stringent sanctions are being applied even as North Korea has, at least temporarily, ceased its missile tests. The North hasn’t launched a missile test since Sept. 15 – more than two months ago.

Some believe the North’s reticence is due to Chinese pressure. If this is accurate, we imagine Xi’s government might loosen its grip.
 

US Sanctions Against Venezuela Will Hurt Americans

After fifty years of imposing embargoes and other sanctions, the United States never managed to topple Cuba"s communist regime.

After forty years of the same in Iran, the US met with similar amounts of success.

Ongoing sanctions against North Korea have not toppled to regime there. 

But, some people in Washington won"t let decades of failure dissuade them. 

Last week, Congressman Mike Coffman (R-Colo.) introduced new legislation to bar Americans from importing oil products from Venezuela. The Washington Examiner reports: 

[T]he Protecting Against Tyranny and Responsible Imports Act, or the PATRIA Act ... would target Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro after he stripped the country"s democratically elected national assembly of its power and authority. According to the bill, the proposed ban on imports would last until the assembly"s power is fully restored.

"The goal is to change the conduct, the character of the Venezuelan government under Maduro. I think the window is closing," Coffman told the Washington Examiner. "They are dependent upon the export of oil really to fund their government, and without that, they can"t pay their security forces."

Experience suggests there is little reason to believe that sanctions will cause the regime to give up in Venezuela. If the regime has less oil money with which to pay the military, the regime can always steal more from the average citizen to make up the difference. In other words, ordinary Venezuelans will suffer more in response to US sanctions. 

Source. 

Moreover, aggressive moves such as these against the Venezuelan regime have tended to only solidify support for the regime among its supporters. Both the current president Maduro, and his predecessor Hugo Chávez, were both successful in building support for themselves on a platform of opposing US meddling in Venezuelan political and economic institutions. 

When the US threatens to intervene in local politics, this only strengthens the resolve and support of the regime"s supporters. 

The US has already been acting in a reckless manner in this regard, as illustrated by President Donald Trump"s recent speculations about invading Venezuela to effect regime change. As noted by Daniel Politi at Slate, American threats directed at the Venezuelan regime do nothing to help the opposition: 

Throughout his power grab that has accompanied Venezuela’s descent into chaos, Maduro has long warned the United States was planning to invade the country. Trump’s words seemed to play straight into his narrative, recalling a time when Washington saw Latin America as its backyard where it could intimidate governments into doing its bidding.

“Maduro must be thrilled right now,” said Mark Feierstein, who was a senior aide on Venezuela to former president Barack Obama. “It"s hard to imagine a more damaging thing for Trump to say.”

Similarly, threatening Venezuela with more sanctions — something that may make the regime even more violent and desperate — do nothing to help the Venezuelan people in general, and only energize the regime"s base. 

Coffman claims the sanctions would be lifted if the Venezuelan regime were to restore the prerogatives and power of the national legislature, which has essentially been disbanded by Maduro. 

In recent months, the Venezuelan regime has rapidly become more dictatorial as forces loyal to Maduro have increasingly clamped down on opposition politicians and essentially ignored the results of recent elections that have brought many opposition leaders to power in the National Assembly. 

The working philosophy here, apparently, is that the imposition of sanctions will force the Venezuelan regime to democratize in response. One would be hard pressed to find examples of similar tactics actually working, however.

More astute observers might also ask why — if Coffman is so committed to democracy — he hasn"t called for similar embargoes of Saudi Arabian oil. The Saudi regime, of course, has been a dictatorship ever since its founding, sponsors international terrorism, and tolerates no religious freedom or freedom of speech. The Saudi regime, for instance, routinely arrests critics of the regime, and the regime"s spokesman has outright denied that elections should be allowed in Saudi Arabia. 

If human rights are of such pressing concern to the Congressman, its unclear why Venezuela is at the top of the sanctions list. 

As with all Trade Sanctions, Americans Suffer 

As with any discussion of sanctions, of course, we need not even consider the strategic futility of sanctions, or the morality of foreign regimes. 

Far from being a matter only of concern to foreigners, US sanctions are built on the cornerstone of limiting the freedoms of Americans.

As I noted earlier in regards to the Cuban embargo: 

[S]upporting an embargo means supporting the government when it fines, prosecutes, and jails peaceful citizens who attempt to engage in truly free trade. Support for an embargo also requires support for a customs bureaucracy that spies on merchants and consumers, and the whole panoply of enforcement programs necessary to punish those who run afoul of the government’s arbitrary pronouncements on what kind of trade is acceptable, and what kind is verboten. Naturally, this is all paid for by the taxpayers...

At their heart, embargoes are nothing but a specific type of prohibition. Sometimes, the government imposes prohibitions on transactions involving certain goods, such as cannabis. Other times, the prohibition extends to all transactions with people in a certain place. The fundamentals are the same, however, in that they prohibit peaceful exchange, with heavy penalties for violators.

In the case of a new embargo against Venezuela, the effect would be to place prohibitions on American importers, and thus drive up prices for oil and energy for all Americans. Government bureaucrats would be dispatched to monitor private industry to make sure they don"t violate the prohibitions. Government agents will impose fines, and make arrests if necessary. The American government will become more powerful at the expense of American consumers and American taxpayers. 

Indeed, this has already been going on with smaller-scale sanctions imposed by the Trump administration against Citgo oil refineries. Thanks to the sanctions, Citgo refineries in the US, which constitute four percent of American fuel capacity, and which employ American workers, are finding it more costly to obtain the oil they need for the refineries. Both domestic and foreign suppliers must scramble to work around the new regulations in order to avoid fines and lawsuits from government regulators who oversee trade. The effect of this will be to put pressure on more marginal employees and on more marginal operations, leading to layoffs and diminished refining capacity. Ultimately, it is Americans who will pay the price.

Jim Rogers Warns "If Trump Starts A Trade War With China, It Will End US Hegemony"

Following Treasury Secretary Mnuchin"s threat that the US could impose economic sanctions on China if it does not implement the new sanctions regime against North Korea:

"If China doesn’t follow these sanctions, we will put additional sanctions on them and prevent them from accessing the US and international dollar system, and that’s quite meaningful."

Billionaire investor and commodity guru Jim Rogers has a warning for the Trump administration - this would hurt America more because it just forces China and Russia and other countries to cooperate.

RT: What is the likelihood that the US will go through with and actually impose economic sanctions on China if it does not implement the new sanctions regime against North Korea?

Jim Rogers: Sanctions are sanctions. They could do sanctions which are not very important or don’t do much damage. And then they will have good public relations which says they have sanctions, but it is meaningless. I would suspect if anything, that is what they will start with. If they put sanctions on China in a big way, it brings the whole world economy down. And in the end, it hurts America more than it hurts China because it just forces China and Russia and other countries closer together. Russia and China and other countries are already trying to come up with a new financial system. If America puts sanctions on them, they would have to do it that much faster and in the end America will lose its monopoly on the financial system, which will hurt America more than anybody.

RT: What do you think, is it an empty rhetoric and saber-rattling from Donald Trump because he said “those [UN] sanctions are nothing compared to what ultimately will have to happen” without specifying what he meant by that. Do you think this is just mere bluff on the part of the US, or would it really use the ‘nuclear option’?

JR: If it uses a nuclear option for sanctions, it will hurt America much more than will hurt North Korea, it will hurt America much more than it will hurt China, Russia and everybody else. It will force the rest of the world to find an alternative to the US financial system. If he does that, it is going to cause a lot of turmoil in the world financial economy and in the end it is going to hurt America more than it is going to hurt anybody else.

I would give you an example, if you look at Russian agriculture right now – America put sanctions on Russian agriculture trying to hurt Russia, but it has helped Russian agriculture. Russian agriculture is booming now. In the end, America has hurt itself more than it has hurt anybody else.

RT: If that happens, what would the consequences be for the global economy? Could this end up becoming a global economic crisis?

JR: We are probably going to have a global economic problem, maybe even crisis, in the next couple of years. This may be one of the things that start it. There is always something which starts a crisis. If America does something like this, this could be the thing that did it. In 1929, it started when America started a huge trade war with the rest of the world and the economists said, “please, this is a mistake,” but America did that anyway. And then we had a great collapse and The Great Depression of the 1930s.

RT: Washington runs a $350 billion annual trade deficit with Beijing. China also holds more than $1 trillion in US debt. How could the US actually threaten China in such circumstances?

JR: Mr. Trump has been saying for over a year, two years, that he was going to start a trade war with China. He was going to put very high tariffs on Chinese goods. In his mind, he wants to do it, he is ready to do it. Some of his advisors are very much in favor of a trade war. It may very well happen. If it happens, it is going to be very bad for the world and it is going to be worse for America than for other people.

Furthermore, as we detailed previously, Beijing has announced plans to start a crude oil futures contract priced in yuan and convertible into gold and Rogers understands how much of a game changer this could be for an industry dominated by the dollar.

"This is just another step in that direction. Many people do not like using US dollars because if the US gets angry at you, they just set enormous pressure on you that can even get you out of business. China, Russia, and other countries understand this, and they are trying to move world trade and world finance away from that,” said the Jim Rogers.

As China is the world’s biggest crude buyer, the new contract may allow exporters to avoid US sanctions by trading oil in yuan. Such countries as Russia, Iran, Pakistan, Vietnam, China and many other Asian countries are interested in that, according to the expert.

The futures contract will allow participants to pay with gold or to convert yuan into gold without the necessity to keep money in Chinese assets or turn it into US dollars.

“The world has been moving that way. Iran will accept renminbi (yuan) from China now. The world is moving that way. China and Russia have currently swaps in rubles and renminbis. It is happening. But it is happening slowly. It takes a lot of time,” Rogers said.

The investor stressed the shift is not going to happen swiftly.

“In this case, there are so many people that actively want it, I would suspect that in less than ten years you will see a major shift into the trading of oil to Asia,” he said.

“When US dollar replaced the pound sterling, there was no one really going around trying to do it quickly. But now you have major economies: Russia, China, Iran and others – very much want this to happen. So, it will happen faster,” Rogers added.

Paul Craig Roberts: "Behold, A Pale Horse, And Its Rider Is Washington"

Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

Two of America’s most populous states, Texas and Florida, are in hurricane ruins, and Washington is fomenting more wars.

The US national debt is now over $20 trillion, and Washington is fomenting more wars.

The entire world is helping Washington foment wars - including two targeted countries themselves - Russia and China - both of which are helping Washington foment more wars. Believe it or not, both Russia and China voted with Washington on the UN Security Council to impose more and harsher sanctions on North Korea, a country guilty of nothing but a desire to have the means to protect itself from the US and not become yet another Washington victim like Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Syria, Serbia, and Ukraine overthrown in a US coup and now poverty-stricken.

I once thought that Russia and China were checks on Washington’s unilateralism, but apparently not.

Both governments have been knuckled under by Washington and both voted to punish North Korea for striving to be sufficiently armed to protect its sovereignty from Washington.

Why are Russia and China repeating their same mistake that they made when they supported Washington’s no-fly UN resolution for Libya, a resolution that Washington and NATO stood on its head when they launched air attacks that helped the CIA organized “jihadists” overthrow Libya’s progressive government and murder Gaddafi?

Russia knows that it is surrounded by US nuclear and military bases. So does China. The question is: have Russia and China capitulated out of fear? Or is their cooperation with Washington a ruse while they prepare their own strike on Washington, or are the two misguided governments trying to cooperate with Washington a la sanctions so as to avoid having to confront a US military attack on North Korea?

It requires much competence to confront evil, and there is probably more evil in Washington than there is competence in Russia and China, two countries interested in being rich to an extent that it might cost them their sovereignty and existence.

When you see such potentially powerful countries as Russia and China collapse under Washington’s pressure in the UN Security Council, it makes you wonder if the various analyses of Washington’s many weaknesses are real, and if they are real, if Russia and China are aware of them.

How does one go about explaining why two countries, whose sovereignty is in the way of Washington’s world hegemony, help their known enemy bully yet another small country, especially one in their orbit of influence? How can Russia complain of sanctions against Russia based on nothing but Washington’s propaganda when Russia supports sanctions against North Korea based on Washington’s propaganda?

Russia and China have nothing to fear from North Korean nuclear weapons. Indeed, no one does except a country that attacks North Korea. What is the explanation for Russia and China lining up with Washington’s foreign policy against North Korea when Russia and China know that Washington’s foreign policy is hostile to Russia and China?

Just the other day Washington announced that it was increasing its navy warships in the South China Sea to make sure China doesn’t think the South China Sea is Chinese, instead of American, territorial waters.

Just the other day more election interfering charges were leveled against Russia.

This time Facebook was the mechanism by which Russia stole the US presidential election.

These positions taken by Washington are absurd.

Yet, they are becoming the reality. The frightening development is that the entire world, the entirely of the UN and Security Council are now captured by Washington in The Matrix. It seems that not even Russia and China can any longer see their own national interest.

Russia and China are working hand-in-hand with Washington toward their own demise.

It is becoming biblical.

Russia TV Reporter Sucker Punched During Live Broadcast

A video of a drunk man punching a Russian TV journalist in the face during a segment on Paratroopers’ Day celebrations is going viral.

Nikita Razvozzhayev, a correspondent with Russian news channel NTV, was confronted Wednesday by the intoxicated man in Gorky Park, Moscow"s most popular recreational area, according to a report in the Telegraph.

In the video, the attacker can be seen interrupting Razvozzhayev"s live report by walking into the camera frame and shouting (in Russian) "This is our country! We will conquer Ukraine!"

Razvozzhayev can be heard politely asking the man to be quiet; instead, the man decked him in the face.

The broadcast then switched back to the studio, where the anchor told viewers that there were “problems” on the ground, before saying she hoped her colleague was ok.  

On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump signed a bill expanding US sanctions on Russia. The bill prevents him from acting unilaterally to remove certain sanctions on Russia and adds sanctions against Russia, Iran and North Korea. The bill passed both chambers of Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support, increasing the probability that Congress would vote to override should Trump veto the bill.

However, in a signing statement attached to the bill, Trump criticized the legislation as “flawed,” saying he would sign it "with reservations" about its impact and the constitutionality of some provisions.

Back in February, during her first appearance as UN Ambassador, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, slammed Russia’s backing of rebels in Eastern Ukraine, saying that while the US would like to improve relations with Russia, “the dire situation in eastern Ukraine is one that demands clear and strong condemnation of Russian actions." Russia has blamed the escalation on the Ukrainians.

The controversial sanctions bill is already straining the relationship between the US and one of its staunchest allies, the European Union.

Germany and Austria, two of Russia"s biggest energy clients in Europe, criticized the bill shortly after it passed the Senate in a 98-2 vote, saying they could affect European businesses involved in piping in Russian natural gas. European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said Wednesday that the EU is ready to retaliate should the sanctions against Russia affect European companies, according to Bloomberg.

Circling back to the assault, the Telegraph reported that it wasn"t immediately clear whether the reporter’s injury was serious. The attacker, whose name wasn’t released, has been arrested. Police are investigating the incident. Paratroopers Day is meant to celebrate veterans and active duty airborne servicemen.

Judging by the footage, the reporter maintained his poise while absorbing the blow, which was remarkable.

We wonder: Do Russian journalism schools teach students how to take a sucker punch?

Or maybe this drunk buffoon just doesn’t know how to throw one.
 

Trump Confirms He Will Sign Russia Sanctions Bill

Following the approval from overwhelming majorities in both the House (419-3) and Senate (98-2), President Trump has just confirmed that he will sign the Russia sanctions bill into law.  The confirmation comes despite days of speculation after Anthony Scaramucci told CNN that Trump could sign the sanctions bill or "veto the sanctions and negotiate an even tougher deal against the Russians."

"President Donald J. Trump read early drafts of the bill and negotiated regarding critical elements of it.  He has now reviewed the final version and, based on its responsiveness to his negotiations, approves the bill and intends to sign it."

JUST IN: President Trump to sign Russia sanctions, White House says. POTUS "approves the bill and intends to sign it." pic.twitter.com/gMMlzPakdY

— ABC News (@ABC) July 29, 2017

Your move, Mr. Putin.

* * *

For those who missed it, here is some background on the bill from our prior posts:

Two days after the House passed bipartisan legislation in a 419-3 vote codifying and imposing further sanctions against Russia, Iran and North Korea and preventing the president from acting unilaterally to remove certain sanctions on Russia, moments ago the Senate also overwhelmingly approved the measure in a 98-2 vote.  Only Senators Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders voting no. The bill will now head to the White House where it will be either signed into law by the president or vetoed, setting up a potential showdown with the White House over Russia. The move marks congressional Republicans" first rebuke of Trump"s foreign policy, where the administration"s warmer stance toward Russia has drawn heavy skepticism from both parties.

The three countries named in the bill are accused of violating “the international order” by Senator Bob Menendez, the former chairman of the foreign relations committee.

Under the bill, existing sanctions on Russia for its aggression in Ukraine and interference in the 2016 election would be codified into law. New sanctions would go into effect against Iran for its ballistic missile development, while North Korea’s shipping industry and people who use slave labor would be targeted amid the isolated nation’s efforts to launch an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).

While a full breakdown of the key details in the legislation is provided at the bottom of this post, in a nutshell the sanctions target Russian gas and pipeline developments by codifying six of Barack Obama’s executive orders implementing sanctions on Russia for its alleged interference in the US elections.

John McCain lauded the bipartisan process that supported the bill: “We will not tolerate attacks on our democracy!” the Senator, who chairs the armed services committee, said from the Senate floor. “That"s what this bill is all about.”

The Senate passage now sends the sanctions bill to Trump"s desk, although lawmakers expressed mixed expectations on whether the president would sign it into law. In recent days, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders offered mixed messages in recent days.  On Sunday, Sanders told ABC’s “This Week” that the administration supports the bill. But on Monday, she told reporters on Air Force One that Trump is “going to study that legislation” before making a final decision.

* * *

Should Trump sign the bill into law, a prompt Russian response is imminent. On Thursday, Russia"s Kommersant newspaper reported that Russia is planning “symmetrical" response to earlier U.S. actions, including expelling diplomats and seizing U.S. Embassy properties, if and when Trump signs the new sanctions legislation.

It noted that Russia may take the Serebryany Bor vacation complex, and send home 35 diplomats, the same number as the Russian diplomats who were expelled by Barack Obama late in December. Komersant added that Russia may also limit maximum number of U.S. diplomatic personnel, which currently exceeds Russian staff in U.S.

Also on Thursday, Vladimir Putin said that Russia would be forced to retaliate if Washington pressed ahead with what he called illegal new sanctions against Moscow, describing U.S. conduct towards his country as boorish and unreasonable.

"As you know, we are exercising restraint and patience, but at some moment we"ll have to retaliate. It"s impossible to endlessly tolerate this boorishness towards our country," Putin told a joint news conference during a press conference in Findland.

"When will our response follow? What will it be? That will depend on the final version of the draft law which is now being debated in the U.S. Senate."

Putin also spoke about an ongoing diplomatic row between Moscow and Washington which erupted last December when then U.S. President Barack Obama ordered the seizure of Russian diplomatic property in the United States and the expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats.

"This goes beyond all reasonable bounds," said Putin. "And now these sanctions - they are also absolutely unlawful from the point of view of international law." Calling the proposed sanctions "extremely cynical," Putin said the demarche looked like an attempt by Washington to use its "geopolitical advantages ... to safeguard its economic interests at the expense of its allies".

* * *

But while Russia"s adverse reaction is to be expected, it is the EU"s response that will be closely watched.

According to an internal memo leaked to the FT earlier in the week, Brussles said it should act "within days" if new sanctions the US plans to impose on Russia prove to be damaging to Europe’s trade ties with Moscow. Retaliatory measures may include limiting US jurisdiction over EU companies. The memo, reported by the Financial Times and Politico, has emerged amid mounting European opposition to a US bill seeking to hit Russia with a new round of sanctions. 

Morning London, while you were sleeping this was our most read story https://t.co/eC4kSgYeHN

— Financial Times (@FT) July 24, 2017

The document said European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker was particularly concerned the sanctions would neglect the interests of European companies. Juncker said Brussels “should stand ready to act within days” if sanctions on Russia are “adopted without EU concerns being taken into account,” according to the Financial Times.

The EU memo also warns that “the measures could impact a potentially large number of European companies doing legitimate business under EU measures with Russian entities in the railways, financial, shipping or mining sectors, among others.”

The freshly leaked memo suggests that the EU is seeking “a public declaration” from the Trump administration that it will not apply the new sanctions in a way that targets European interests.  Other options on the table include triggering the ‘Blocking Statute,’ an EU regulation that limits the enforcement of extraterritorial US laws in Europe. A number of “WTO-compliant retaliatory measures” are also being considered, according to the memo.

Over the weekend, we reported that Brussles expressed its concerns over the sanctions bill, when the European Commission said in a statement that “the Russia/Iran sanctions bill is driven primarily by domestic considerations,” adding that it “could have unintended consequences, not only when it comes to Transatlantic/G7 unity, but also on EU economic and energy security interests.” 

And so, trapped between looking like a Russian crony on one hand if he refuses to sign the bill, and inflaming relations with not only Moscow but also Europe if he does sign, it will be up to Trump to determine if the feud with Russia escalates even more and involves European nations who are far closer to Russia in socio-economic terms than they would like to admit.

* * *

Finally, courtesy of Goldman, here are the main details of the legislation:

Here are the main details of the draft legislation:

• Codifies existing US sanctions on Russia and requires Congressional review before they are lifted.


• Reduces from 30 days to 14 days the maximum allowed maturity for new debt and new extensions of credit to the state controlled financial institutions targeted under the sectoral sanctions.


• Reduces from 90 days to 60 days the maximum allowed maturity for new debt and new extensions of credit to sectoral sanctions targets in the energy sector, although this largely only brings US sanctions in line with existing EU sanctions, which already impose a 30-day maximum for most energy companies.


• Expands the existing Executive Order authorising sectoral sanctions to include additional sectors of the Russian economy: railways and metals and mining.


• Requires sanctions on any person found to have invested $10 million or more, or facilitated such an investment, in the privatisation of Russian state-owned assets if they have “actual knowledge” that the privatisation “unjustly benefits” Russian government officials or their close associates or family members.


• Authorises (but does not require) sanctions “in coordination with allies” on any person found to have knowingly made an investment of $1 million or more (or $5 million or more in any 12-month period), or knowingly provided goods or services of the same value, for construction, modernisation, or repair of Russia’s energy export pipelines.


• Orders the treasury, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of State, to prepare detailed reports within the next 180 days:
  
  • on Russia’s oligarchs and parastatal companies including individual oligarchs" closeness to the Russian state, their involvement in corrupt activities and the potential impact of expanding sanctions with respect to Russian oligarchs, Russian state-owned enterprises, and Russian parastatal entities, including impacts on the entities themselves and on the economy of the Russian Federation, as well as the exposure of key US economic sectors to these entities.
  
  
  • on the impact of debt- and equity-related sanctions being extended to include sovereign debt and the full range of derivative products.
  
  

Paul Craig Roberts Sees "A Ray Of Light" From Europe

Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

America has been a discouraging landscape ever since the neoconservatives took over US foreign policy during the Clinton regime and started the two decades of war crimes that define 21st century America and ever since US corporations betrayed the US work force by moving American jobs to Asia.

The outlook became darker when the Obama regime resurrected the Russian Threat and elevated the prospect of military conflict between the nuclear powers.

As Europe is caught in the middle, in normal circumstances European countries would have insisted that Washington cease the gratuitous provocations of Russia. But normal circumstances have not existed.

Since the end of WW2, European countries have been vassals without independent economic and foreign policies.

Europe hosts US military bases that threaten Russia. Europe has backed Washington’s wars of aggression against Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Washington’s air attacks on provinces of Pakistan, and Washington’s use of Saudi Arabia to fight its proxy war against Yemen.

Europe has backed Washington’s gratuitous economic sanctions against Iran and Russia, sanctions that have cost Europe much and Washington little.

Accustomed to having its way with Europe, Washington commits Europe without even consulting the vassal governments.

Now it seems Washington’s extraordinary arrogance and hubris has resulted in overreach. Confronted with a new round of sanctions against Russia, Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission told Washington that the time has passed when Washington can put its interests first and Europe’s last.

The new sanctions have devastating economic and political consequences for Europe.

Juncker said that if Europe’s “concerns are not taken into account sufficiently, we stand ready to act appropriately within a matter of days.”

The German and French foreign ministries added their support to Juncker. The German foreign ministry said:

“It is not in the Americans’ right to judge or stipulate which way European companies may engage in cooperation with any third parties – particularly, with Russian energy companies.”

The French foreign ministry said: the sanctions “contradict international law” due to their “extraterritorial reach.”

Europe views the sanctions as a tool of US industrial policy that elevates US business interests over Europe’s business interests.

Let’s hope that Washington’s arrogance will not permit Washington to back down and that Europe will give Washington the finger and disengage from the American Empire.

Without Europe to host its military bases and to parrot its propaganda, Washington’s ability to threaten Russia would significantly decline. Indeed, a continuation of the hostile threatening attitude toward Russia would leave Washington isolated in the world.

No country wants the risk of experiencing nuclear war merely for the sake of Washington’s unilateralism.

Senate Overwhelmingly Votes For New Russia Sanctions, Now It's Up To Trump

Two days after the House passed bipartisan legislation in a 419-3 vote codifying and imposing further sanctions against Russia, Iran and North Korea and preventing the president from acting unilaterally to remove certain sanctions on Russia, moments ago the Senate also overwhelmingly approved the measure in a 98-2 vote.  Only Senators Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders voting no. The bill will now head to the White House where it will be either signed into law by the president or vetoed, setting up a potential showdown with the White House over Russia. The move marks congressional Republicans" first rebuke of Trump"s foreign policy, where the administration"s warmer stance toward Russia has drawn heavy skepticism from both parties.

The three countries named in the bill are accused of violating “the international order” by Senator Bob Menendez, the former chairman of the foreign relations committee.

Under the bill, existing sanctions on Russia for its aggression in Ukraine and interference in the 2016 election would be codified into law. New sanctions would go into effect against Iran for its ballistic missile development, while North Korea’s shipping industry and people who use slave labor would be targeted amid the isolated nation’s efforts to launch an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM).

While a full breakdown of the key details in the legislation is provided at the bottom of this post, in a nutshell the sanctions target Russian gas and pipeline developments by codifying six of Barack Obama’s executive orders implementing sanctions on Russia for its alleged interference in the US elections.

John McCain lauded the bipartisan process that supported the bill: “We will not tolerate attacks on our democracy!” the Senator, who chairs the armed services committee, said from the Senate floor. “That"s what this bill is all about.”

The Senate passage now sends the sanctions bill to Trump"s desk, although lawmakers expressed mixed expectations on whether the president would sign it into law. In recent days, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders offered mixed messages in recent days.  On Sunday, Sanders told ABC’s “This Week” that the administration supports the bill. But on Monday, she told reporters on Air Force One that Trump is “going to study that legislation” before making a final decision.

* * *

Should Trump sign the bill into law, a prompt Russian response is imminent. On Thursday, Russia"s Kommersant newspaper reported that Russia is planning “symmetrical" response to earlier U.S. actions, including expelling diplomats and seizing U.S. Embassy properties, if and when Trump signs the new sanctions legislation.

It noted that Russia may take the Serebryany Bor vacation complex, and send home 35 diplomats, the same number as the Russian diplomats who were expelled by Barack Obama late in December. Komersant added that Russia may also limit maximum number of U.S. diplomatic personnel, which currently exceeds Russian staff in U.S.

Also on Thursday, Vladimir Putin said that Russia would be forced to retaliate if Washington pressed ahead with what he called illegal new sanctions against Moscow, describing U.S. conduct towards his country as boorish and unreasonable.

"As you know, we are exercising restraint and patience, but at some moment we"ll have to retaliate. It"s impossible to endlessly tolerate this boorishness towards our country," Putin told a joint news conference during a press conference in Findland.

"When will our response follow? What will it be? That will depend on the final version of the draft law which is now being debated in the U.S. Senate."

Putin also spoke about an ongoing diplomatic row between Moscow and Washington which erupted last December when then U.S. President Barack Obama ordered the seizure of Russian diplomatic property in the United States and the expulsion of 35 Russian diplomats.

"This goes beyond all reasonable bounds," said Putin. "And now these sanctions - they are also absolutely unlawful from the point of view of international law." Calling the proposed sanctions "extremely cynical," Putin said the demarche looked like an attempt by Washington to use its "geopolitical advantages ... to safeguard its economic interests at the expense of its allies".

* * *

But while Russia"s adverse reaction is to be expected, it is the EU"s response that will be closely watched.

According to an internal memo leaked to the FT earlier in the week, Brussles said it should act "within days" if new sanctions the US plans to impose on Russia prove to be damaging to Europe’s trade ties with Moscow. Retaliatory measures may include limiting US jurisdiction over EU companies. The memo, reported by the Financial Times and Politico, has emerged amid mounting European opposition to a US bill seeking to hit Russia with a new round of sanctions. 

Morning London, while you were sleeping this was our most read story https://t.co/eC4kSgYeHN

— Financial Times (@FT) July 24, 2017

The document said European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker was particularly concerned the sanctions would neglect the interests of European companies. Juncker said Brussels “should stand ready to act within days” if sanctions on Russia are “adopted without EU concerns being taken into account,” according to the Financial Times.

The EU memo also warns that “the measures could impact a potentially large number of European companies doing legitimate business under EU measures with Russian entities in the railways, financial, shipping or mining sectors, among others.”

The freshly leaked memo suggests that the EU is seeking “a public declaration” from the Trump administration that it will not apply the new sanctions in a way that targets European interests.  Other options on the table include triggering the ‘Blocking Statute,’ an EU regulation that limits the enforcement of extraterritorial US laws in Europe. A number of “WTO-compliant retaliatory measures” are also being considered, according to the memo.

Over the weekend, we reported that Brussles expressed its concerns over the sanctions bill, when the European Commission said in a statement that “the Russia/Iran sanctions bill is driven primarily by domestic considerations,” adding that it “could have unintended consequences, not only when it comes to Transatlantic/G7 unity, but also on EU economic and energy security interests.”

And so, trapped between looking like a Russian crony on one hand if he refuses to sign the bill, and inflaming relations with not only Moscow but also Europe if he does sign, it will be up to Trump to determine if the feud with Russia escalates even more and involves European nations who are far closer to Russia in socio-economic terms than they would like to admit.

* * *

Finally, courtesy of Goldman, here are the main details of the legislation:

Here are the main details of the draft legislation:

• Codifies existing US sanctions on Russia and requires Congressional review before they are lifted.


• Reduces from 30 days to 14 days the maximum allowed maturity for new debt and new extensions of credit to the state controlled financial institutions targeted under the sectoral sanctions.


• Reduces from 90 days to 60 days the maximum allowed maturity for new debt and new extensions of credit to sectoral sanctions targets in the energy sector, although this largely only brings US sanctions in line with existing EU sanctions, which already impose a 30-day maximum for most energy companies.


• Expands the existing Executive Order authorising sectoral sanctions to include additional sectors of the Russian economy: railways and metals and mining.


• Requires sanctions on any person found to have invested $10 million or more, or facilitated such an investment, in the privatisation of Russian state-owned assets if they have “actual knowledge” that the privatisation “unjustly benefits” Russian government officials or their close associates or family members.


• Authorises (but does not require) sanctions “in coordination with allies” on any person found to have knowingly made an investment of $1 million or more (or $5 million or more in any 12-month period), or knowingly provided goods or services of the same value, for construction, modernisation, or repair of Russia’s energy export pipelines.


• Orders the treasury, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of State, to prepare detailed reports within the next 180 days:
  
  • on Russia’s oligarchs and parastatal companies including individual oligarchs" closeness to the Russian state, their involvement in corrupt activities and the potential impact of expanding sanctions with respect to Russian oligarchs, Russian state-owned enterprises, and Russian parastatal entities, including impacts on the entities themselves and on the economy of the Russian Federation, as well as the exposure of key US economic sectors to these entities.
  
  
  • on the impact of debt- and equity-related sanctions being extended to include sovereign debt and the full range of derivative products.
  
  

Ron Paul: Trump Should Veto Congress' Foolish New Sanctions Bill

Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

This week’s expected House vote to add more sanctions on Russia, Iran, and North Korea is a prime example of how little thought goes into US foreign policy. Sanctions have become kind of an automatic action the US government takes when it simply doesn’t know what else to do.

No matter what the problem, no matter where on earth it occurs, the answer from Washington is always sanctions. Sanctions are supposed to force governments to change policies and do what Washington tells them or face the wrath of their people. So the goal of sanctions is to make life as miserable as possible for civilians so they will try to overthrow their governments. Foreign leaders and the elites do not suffer under sanctions. This policy would be immoral even if it did work, but it does not.

As Ron Paul relates...

Why is Congress so eager for more sanctions on Russia? The neocons and the media have designated Russia as the official enemy and the military industrial complex and other special interests want to continue getting rich terrifying Americans into believing the propaganda.

Why, just weeks after the White House affirmed that Iran is abiding by its obligations under the nuclear treaty, does Congress pass additional sanctions anyway? Washington blames Iran for “destabilizing” Syria and Iraq by helping them fight ISIS and al-Qaeda. Does this make any sense at all?

When is the last time Iran committed a terrorist act on our soil? It hasn’t. Yet we learned from the declassified 28 pages of the Congressional 9/11 report that Saudi Arabia was deeply involved in the 2001 attacks against Washington and New York. Who has funded al-Qaeda and ISIS in Syria for years? Saudi Arabia. Yet no one is talking about sanctions against that country. This is because sanctions are not about our security. They are about politics and special interests.

Why is Congress poised to add yet more sanctions on North Korea? Do they want the North Korean people to suffer more than they are already suffering? North Korea’s GDP is half that of Vermont – the US state with the lowest GDP! Does anyone believe they are about to invade us? There is much talk about North Korea’s ballistic missile program, but little talk about 30,000 US troops and weapons on North Korea’s border. For Washington, it’s never a threat if we do it to the other guy.

Here’s an alternative to doing the same thing over and over: Let’s take US troops out of North Korea after 70 years. The new South Korean president has proposed military talks with North Korea to try and reduce tensions. We should get out of the way and let them solve their own problems. If Iran and Russia want to fight ISIS and al-Qaeda at the invitation of their ally, Syria, why stand in the way? We can’t run the world. We are out of money.

President Trump was elected to pursue a new kind of foreign policy. If he means what he said on the campaign trail, he will veto this foolish sanctions bill and begin dismantling neocon control of his Administration.

Senate Overwhelmingly Approves New Sanctions To "Punish" Russia

The U.S. Senate on Wednesday approved new sanctions to punish Russia for "meddling" in the 2016 election.

The bipartisan legislation, which passed with an overwhelming 97-2 vote, slaps new sanctions on Russia and restricts President Trump from easing them in the future without first receiving congressional approval. The only two senators to vote against the measure were Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Rand Paul (R-KY), while Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland) abstained. 

Known as the Crapo Amendment, after Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, the measure was endorsed by Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tennessee) and ranking member Ben Cardin (D-Maryland). The deal was attached to an Iran sanctions bill that is expected to pass later this week. While top Republican senators had initially wanted to give the White House space to try improving U.S.-Russia relations, but ultimately decided talks with Russia have been moving too slowly.

The sanctions against Russia are “in response to the violation of the territorial integrity of the Ukraine and Crimea, its brazen cyber-attacks and interference in elections, and its continuing aggression in Syria,” according to the deal"s sponsors.

The amendment also allows “broad new sanctions on key sectors of Russia’s economy, including mining, metals, shipping and railways” and authorizes “robust assistance to strengthen democratic institutions and counter disinformation across Central and Eastern European countries that are vulnerable to Russian aggression and interference.”

New sanctions would be imposed on “corrupt Russian actors” and those “involved in serious human rights abuses,” anyone supplying weapons to the Syrian government or working with Russian defense industry or intelligence, as well as “those conducting malicious cyber activity on behalf of the Russian government” and “those involved in corrupt privatization of state-owned assets.”

The biggest neocon in Congress, John McCain, was delighted with the outcome: “We must take our own side in this fight. Not as Republicans, not as Democrats, but as Americans,” said Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) before the vote. “It’s time to respond to Russia’s attack on American democracy with strength, with resolve, with common purpose, and with action.”

As AP adds, lawmakers took action against Russia in the absence of a forceful response from President Donald Trump. While the president has sought to improve relations with Moscow and rejected the implication that Russian hacking of Democratic emails tipped the election his way, non-stop "anonymous sources" have repeatedly leaked "news" to the NYT and WaPo, suggesting Trump colluded with Russia and/or was being probed by the FBI. Following Comey"s testimony, which confirmed there is no "there" there, the media attacks against Trump have shifted, and now accuse the president of obstruction of justice and interference with the FBI"s investigation into Mike Flynn.

Speaking earlier on Wednesday, Vladimir Putin"s spokesman Dmitry Peskov said told reporters the Kremlin will hold out with its reaction until the U.S. decides on new sanctions against Russia.

“We wouldn’t like to enter this sanctions spiral again. But that’s not our choice.”  Indeed, and with the US having made Russia"s choice for them, we now look for Moscow"s response.

Incidentally, earlier this week, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told lawmakers that US allies around the world had asked Washington to improve relations with Russia, and warned that further measures against Moscow could hinder ongoing progress in the fight against terrorism in Syria.

“I have yet to have a bilateral, one-on-one, a poolside conversation with a single counterpart in any country: in Europe, Middle East, even South-East Asia, that has not said to me: please, address your relationship with Russia, it has to be improved,” Tillerson said on Tuesday, testifying before the Senate appropriations subcommittee about the proposed State Department budget.

Unfortunately, for the US Military Industrial Complex, which stands to profit only in times of (near) war, a detente with Russia, or any other nation for that matter, is not an option.

Trump Preps New North Korea Sanctions As 'Armada' Continues Toward Peninsula

As the world watches each new North Korean development with bated breath, the Trump administration is reportedly preparing new economic sanctions which could be used in lieu of military force to de-nuclearize the country.

According to Reuters, the sanctions could include a potential oil embargo, intercepting cargo ships headed to North Korea, a ban on the country"s airline, Air Koryo, and punishments for Chinese banks doing business with Pyongyang.

Despite sending a naval force to the Korean peninsula, the Trump administration is focusing its North Korea strategy on tougher economic sanctions, possibly including an oil embargo, banning its airline, intercepting cargo ships and punishing Chinese banks doing business with Pyongyang, U.S. officials say.

U.S. President Donald Trump has approved a preliminary broad approach on North Korea and asked his national security team to craft a more detailed framework for new international sanctions and other actions to counter Pyongyang"s nuclear and missile programs, one official said.

"There"s a whole host of things that are possible, all the way up to what"s essentially a trade quarantine on North Korea," the official told Reuters on Wednesday, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Of course, the U.N. could also impose economic sanctions that would include an embargo on oil supplies to North Korea; a global ban on Air Koryo; and interdiction of North Korean freighters on the high seas, a step that would go beyond an existing requirement for nations to inspect ships transiting their territory.  The United Nations could also prohibit the use of North Korean contracted labor abroad and expand the restrictions on coal exports to a total ban, officials told Reuters.

Another step could be a ban on North Korean seafood exports, Pyongyang"s fourth-largest export to China, its main trading partner, and expanded efforts to seize assets of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and his family.

Meanwhile, as a former U.S. State Department official points out, when it comes to economic sanctions, half measures rarely work.

Some analysts cautioned that targeting Chinese entities with so-called "secondary sanctions" could backfire and make Beijing less willing to cooperate, and that dealing with a country that already has nuclear weapons differs from dealing with one accused of trying acquire them.

"If you want to rely on sanctions to achieve your goal, you have to find a way to persuade or force the world into going all the way to a near full embargo or at least an embargo on key commodities like petroleum and on North Korean hard currency export earnings," said Joseph DeThomas, a former State Department official who worked on Iran and North Korea sanctions.

"Only if the regime sees continuation of sanctions as fatal will it consider change," he said.

Of course, news of economic sanctions comes as Trump"s "armada" is still en route to the Korean peninsula.  And while the White House seems to be open to diplomatic measures, with the assistance of China, U.S. officials have confirmed that military options remain on the table with pre-emptive strikes on North Korea remaining a last resort....a threat which Trump seemingly confirmed personally over Twitter earlier this morning.

I have great confidence that China will properly deal with North Korea. If they are unable to do so, the U.S., with its allies, will! U.S.A.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 13, 2017

Meanwhile, China has already taken steps to cut off imports of North Korean coal shipments with customs data in Beijing on Thursday showing that imports had plunged 52% in the first three months in 2017.  But while China seems to be cooperating with diplomatic efforts to reign in North Korea"s "crazy fat kid", as John McCain has described him, they"ve consistently warned the U.S. against the use of military force. 

China, North Korea"s sole major ally and benefactor, which nevertheless opposes its weapons programme, has called for talks leading to a peaceful resolution and the denuclearisation of the peninsula.

"Military force cannot resolve the issue," Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told reporters in Beijing.

"Amid challenge there is opportunity. Amid tensions we will also find a kind of opportunity to return to talks."

"Whoever provokes the situation, whoever continues to make trouble in this place, they will have to assume historical responsibility," Wang said.

"As soon as North Korea complies with China"s declared advice and suspends nuclear activities ... China will actively work to protect the security of a denuclearised North Korean nation and regime," said an editorial in the Global Times, which is published by the Communist party"s People"s Daily

So the only question now is: who will blink first?

Amazon Discloses Iranian Transactions That May Have Violated US Sanctions, Warns It May Be "Penalized"

In a 10-K filed on Friday afternoon, Amazon disclosed that certain transactions and business ties with Iran may have violated U.S. sanctions, warning that it may be penalized after a regulatory review of the activities.

In the "Other Contingencies" section of its 10-K, Jeff Bezos" company had determined that, between January 2012 and December 2016 it had "processed and delivered orders of consumer products for certain individuals and entities located outside Iran covered by the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act or other United States sanctions and export control laws. The consumer products included books, music, other media, apparel, home and kitchen, health and beauty, jewelry, office, consumer electronics, software, lawn and patio, grocery, and automotive products."

The world"s biggest online retailer also said that it has "voluntarily reported these orders to the United States Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and the United States Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security." and said it will cooperate with a review by the agencies, "which may result in the imposition of penalties."

As Bloomberg, which first spotted the violation, explains, the violations are the result of then-President Barack Obama"s signature of the ITRA in 2012, meant to strengthen trade restrictions on Iran and try to persuade the country to stop its nuclear activities. This law imposes civil penalties and takes other action against foreign subsidiaries of U.S. companies engaging in transactions with Iran. In January 2016, the U.S. lifted many of the economic sanctions tied to the nuclear program.

Amazon further clarified the violations which consisted of consumer products sold to individuals and unspecified groups controlled or owned by the Iranian government, among which "consumer products valued at approximately $50 for an Iranian embassy located in a country other than Iran; consumer products valued at approximately $1,300 for an individual designated under Executive Order 13224; consumer products valued at approximately $2,400 for an entity owned or controlled by the Iranian government; and consumer products valued at approximately $250 for an individual who may have been acting for an entity designated under Executive Order 13382 and owned or controlled by the Iranian government. The consumer products included books, other media, apparel, home and kitchen, jewelry, office, toys, consumer electronics, software, health and beauty, pet products, and lawn and patio."

The company also said that is was "unable accurately to calculate the net profit attributable to these transactions" and said it does "not plan to continue selling to these accounts in the future."

The statement concludes with Amazon"s declaration that its "review is ongoing and we are enhancing our processes designed to identify transactions associated with individuals and entities covered by the ITRA."

Why come clean now, and disclose violations that took place as far back as 2012?

Perhaps because Amazon, along with many other tech companies, was a key catalyst behind the recent successful lawsuit against the Trump administration"s immigration executive order. While it is unknown if AG Sessions (or Trump himself) will retaliate against said companies, Jeff Bezos, who has a long "history" with Trump, decided not to take the chance.