Since Washington did not give a constructive response to Russia's basic proposals on security guarantees, the Russian Foreign Ministry officially warned our Western partners, which are still still there, that "in the absence of US readiness to negotiate, Moscow may resort to military-technical measures."
In the West, in turn, they again started talking about "hellish sanctions in the field of the economy."
And that is why we are, probably, even much more interested in the military-technical, what our, so to speak, "military-economic response" might be.
And here, perhaps, the most interesting begins.
All possible sanctions against the Russian Federation in the real sector, which the United States could impose without critical damage to its own economy (the economy of the Old World is, figuratively speaking, violet to them in this respect), they have already, in general, introduced.
That is why, by the way, when the next “hellish series” is embodied in real life, it, purely by sensations, is more and more reminiscent of the classic “they expected bloodshed from him, but he ate a chizhik” (c) from someone who understood a lot about the fine science of management (no wonder vice served as governor) classic of Russian literature Mikhail Evgrafovich Saltykov-Shchedrin.
They will threaten to take away the mansions from some not very clear “friends of Putin”.
Then Putin himself, what next European girl will threaten to ban shopping on the Champs Elysees in Paris.
All this is somehow very funny for the Russian ear.
As for some really serious things, it was not for nothing that the White House said on Friday evening that the sanctions being prepared by the West are not aimed at hitting Russian energy exports.
And the disconnection of Russia from the SWIFT system, most likely, will not be included in the package of possible new Western sanctions, the same White House informs us.
And there is nothing surprising and even more random in this.
Judge for yourself.
In 2021, gas exports from the Russian Federation alone amounted to approximately 203.5 bcm.
m, and this is about a quarter of consumption, for a second, throughout Europe and Asia.
As for oil exports, it is still cooler there: approximately 20% of the entire world market (239 million tons, if anyone is especially interested in specific figures).
But it's not just about oil and gas, and everyone understands this very well.
For example, one should not simply forget that our country holds a confident first place in the global nickel market with a share of 13.4% and produces about 20% of the world's consumption of this metal.
We also rank 5th in the global ferrous metals market with a 4.9% share and 6th in the global aluminum market with a 3.3% share.
In addition, the Russian Federation is a recognized world export leader in the now scarce fertilizer market, where we occupy approximately 12.8% of the world market, including nitrogen, where Russian products account for more than 35% of world consumption.
That, in the light of the already almost directly announced impending "food crisis" and the closure of many enterprises in Europe due to the high cost of raw materials, including gas, looks quite piquant.
Generally speaking, in monetary terms,
Can anyone even imagine what will happen to the world economy if the Russian Federation simply stops supplying these resources to global markets in one form or another?
Or, let's say, just restrict the supply.
Thus, we can state quite calmly: as for raw material exports, it is not us who can be threatened with sanctions.
With sanctions, if it comes to a serious confrontation, it is we who can threaten the conditional West.
And not with some kind of "sanctions from hell", but a real hell, without any threats, into which we can at least plunge the European economies for sure, simply by pursuing a well-balanced export policy.
Once again - even without any sanctions.
Those who do not believe can simply observe what is currently happening in the energy markets of the same Europe.
And these are no “counter sanctions” on energy exports, sorry, they have not even begun yet.
So - and this is understandable, probably, to all more or less sane people - our "points of vulnerability" are definitely not here.
But they certainly are.
And it is precisely on them that the main blow will be delivered, there is no doubt about it.
Yes, it has already been actually announced - where it will be applied: first of all, this is an extremely vulnerable banking and financial system of the country.
And here we really have real problems.
In particular, because, despite the fact that the real sector (for example, close to the author of the fuel and energy complex) has retained the national character of regulation, regulation in the financial sector has long and almost officially been supranational and extraterritorial in nature.
But, by a strange coincidence, controlled by US financial regulators.
Which, from the point of view of national security, is still somehow acceptable, and even then with reservations, in the conditions of, so to speak, “peacetime”.
But it is completely intolerable during a real - even cold - war.
And the point here is not even the notorious “offshore aristocracy”.
It’s just that our entire banking system has been built since the 90s of the last century on the principle of a vacuum cleaner that sucks money out of the economy and consolidates it in its own “profit centers”, which, from the point of view of classical economics, is actually complete wildness.
And then he also has the audacity to proudly report on “record profits” even during the most terrible crises: well, this is how it, this banking and financial system, was simply conceived in its time.
Not to supply the economy with money, which, in fact, is the meaning of the banking system in the national economy, but to “target the money supply” and prevent the “Dutch”, so to speak, disease.
That is, in Russian speaking, to consolidate profits and then withdraw them somewhere.
And the so-called offshore aristocracy, or, more precisely, exactly the same comprador part of the “elite”, as in Ukraine or in other post-Soviet republics, carefully cultivated by their Western friends like a lamb under the knife, is just an understandable consequence of this frankly crooked, to be honest , banking and financial scheme.
Well, yes, now they will most of all lament about the "freedom of movement of capital" and follow the principle "Katz offers to surrender."
And they, of course, will be echoed by all our "official liberals", as well as other democratic media, which have long been the actual content of the comprador elite.
But here, in general, there is nothing new either.
About “swallowing dust” Putin explained everything to them for a long time and in some detail.
Except, perhaps, that the voter is unlikely to understand the state power now if it throws any state resources to save these “fat cats”: in fact, this is also calculated in the combination to identify “points of vulnerability” , with this, the same Americans are doing very well.
In general, they are traditionally great fellows in this sense.
In particular, it is well known how Trump began his campaign against the PRC: he simply gathered his best sinologists and demanded just information about “points of vulnerability”.
After that, the anti-Chinese campaign went much more successfully, you know.
And why do you think that they will act against us somehow wrong?
In this connection, I personally very much hope that, for example, the project of nationalization of the country's banking system, at least according to the extremely mild and civilized "Hungarian version", is still being worked out by the Russian authorities.
Otherwise, it would be somehow completely strange: any banker, and they are nervous people, will earn schizophrenia when he has at least two bosses - one in Moscow, and the other somewhere in the IMF.
Another equally obvious “point of vulnerability” from the point of view of national security is retail.
Where we see a rather surprising picture: in one of the most socially vulnerable areas of “food security”, we simply do not have a single national trading network.
They all belong to either “real” foreigners or “offshore”, which, in general, is quite parallel in the current situation.
In any case, these owners are definitely not controlled here.
There are other "points of vulnerability" that are also well understood - from educational programs to compulsory health insurance or, for example, the judicial and arbitration system.
But just the energy sector, whether it is gas or oil, the sector (as, by the way, the mineral resource sector in general) is anything but a “point of vulnerability”.
On the contrary, this is our probable military-economic response.
The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editors.