General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRussia State TV: WH source quietly tells Russians that "Number of Russian Diplomats NOT Being Cut"
#Russia's state TV reports that an unnamed high-level White House source quietly told the Russians that the number of Russian diplomats in the U.S. is not being cut (they can send 60 other diplomats to replace the ones being expelled). They quote the source: "The doors are open."
Link to tweet
SOURCE:
Link to tweet
kentuck
(111,094 posts)He doesn't want to piss off Putin.
Farmer-Rick
(10,170 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,706 posts)Raster
(20,998 posts)...and has been for a number of years.
mopinko
(70,103 posts)Igel
(35,309 posts)The diplomats were "expelled", meaning they were declared personae non gratae. The individuals named have so many days to leave the country before they lose diplomatic status. Those individuals are targeted and must leave. The positions they filled are still there and can be filled. So ...
There's a second thing that's important, and that's stipulating the number of diplomatic staff Russia can have in the US with immunity. If you cut that number, then they can't be replaced. I haven't seen a report that we cut their staffing numbers.
A consulate was closed, and that means if Russia's staff number wasn't reduced they can beef up staffing elsewhere. When Russia closed the US SP consulate, they stipulated a reduction in US diplomatic staffers. They also reduced the numbers of British diplomatic staffers.
Now, this might just be American reporter stupidity. The Western international relations geeks talk about individuals, but behind that there may be staffing reductions--I doubt it. But Lavrov and Putin and everybody in between in Russia first talk staffing reductions, and only then say what that entails for numbers of people leaving.
One lets the staffers get replaced. That's disruptive, but they can just get shuffled. Send the Russian spies in Britain to the US, send those in US to Britain. Similar enough language.
This only affects those with diplomatic immunity. There are many unofficial diplomatic workers in the US--they work in all kinds of fields, and many might be citizens. It's also likely that many are here illegally--come in under a tourist visa, stay, and get funded by Moscow for doing stuff in the US. Russia has a fairly good way of cutting down on illegal immigration; the US, not so much. (And if you use a Venezuelan or Nicaraguan operative, you'd even get a lot of people defending you if you're caught.)
When you're actually doing things instead of screaming and preaching and venting, the definitions of the words used matter a lot, and being caught off guard by one's own lack of knowledge isn't grounds for being outraged at others. Well, unless you're a child. None of those here, though.
sharedvalues
(6,916 posts)sharedvalues
(6,916 posts)dalton99a
(81,486 posts)Many countries have the rule of law, but just a few of them those with Anglo-American law allow large-scale anonymous ownership. Most European countries do not. Numerous small islands allow anonymous ownership, but they lack financial depth. Only two countries can harbor most of the Russian offshore wealth the United States and Britain because they allow anonymous investment in real estate on a large scale.
Twenty-nine countries, including most E.U. countries, already demand full disclosure of beneficiary owners, and 11 others have agreed to do so, too. They have all come to the same conclusion: Anonymous ownership has become a major threat to national security. Prime Minister David Cameron promised to demand full disclosure in May 2016, but he resigned two months later, and his successor, May, has shown no interest in doing so even after the nerve-agent attack in Salisbury.
The United States needs to catch up. Congress is currently considering two bills that go in the right direction. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) has submitted a draft of the True Incorporation Transparency for Law Enforcement Act for corporate transparency, and in the House of Representatives the Counter Terrorism and Illicit Finance Act has been submitted. Congress should adopt one of these bills. The important thing is to unearth secret ownership by sanctioned individuals and entities.
sharedvalues
(6,916 posts)HipChick
(25,485 posts)former9thward
(32,006 posts)Now its being believed? No, thanks.