When I first read the headline, I read it as the caller was suggesting that Shamima Begum was an oligarch.
Another coffee for me I think!
>”We can take away the citizenship of people if they’re dual citizens. We’ve done it to Shamima Begum. Why don’t we say to the oligarchs effectively, if you are supporting Putin, you are effectively an enemy of the West?”
This just points the stage lights towards the fucked up morale character of the average Tory nutter.
Shamima Begum is a threat to the security of the UK says MI5 and MI6. A bit unfair making the same comparison with Russian Oligarchs.
OMFG. That is very unfair. Not all are like responsible for Putin. Like others, some are also caught in the middle.
A not great idea that is very unlikely to have the desired effect.
Let’s set aside for one moment the (in my view) very dangerous ramifications of turning citizenship from an inalienable status into a revocable privilege. Strategically, this idea just doesn’t make any sense. One of the major adverse effects of Putin’s invasion and the consequent western sanctions on Russian society is a surge in interest in leaving the country, especially among younger and more cosmopolitan Russians. Polling is very difficult in an autocratic country, but I saw a historian recently cite a figure of somewhere around *fifty-five percent* of Russians under thirty want to leave. If the goal of western nations here is to punish the Kremlin and deprive it of future prosperity, it makes much more sense to encourage such a brain drain, not undermine it by adopting such draconian measures as citizenship-revocation to those Russians already here.
More to the point, I think the political leverage of the oligarchs in Russia is pretty vastly overstated by many western commentators and pundits. Kremlin observers and analysts I’ve come across say that in Russia, political power really lies much more with a security-military elite than an economic elite, increasingly so under Putin’s regime. As Anatol Lieven wrote [just yesterday in the Washington Post](https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/03/04/russian-oligarchs-lack/),
>This is no longer the 1990s, when wealthy business owners dominated the Yeltsin regime. Under Putin, those former “oligarchs” who have pledged loyalty to him have been allowed to keep their wealth (until now), but they have no political power. That is exercised by a narrow circle of top officials and former officials appointed by Putin to control key sections of the energy sector. These men are drawn mainly from the former KGB. They have great wealth, but their primary loyalty is to Putin and the state.
>Russia is the exact opposite of a developed Western country. Power in Russia rests on the accumulated capital earned from the sale of natural resources and hordes of siloviki are prepared to brutally suppress all democratic initiatives and attempts at resistance. Kremlin leaders don’t care about the standard of living or opinions of Russia’s citizens.They care only that they have the loyalty of several thousand senior officials and that two million siloviki receive a regular paycheck and,in return, are ready to defend the government. With authority centralized in this way, independent business and sources of capital are unimportant by definition, as are the country’s millions of managers,business people and professionals. All that matters is the extraction of natural resources and the ability to convert the income from their sale into villas, yachts and military might. […] Now, even Russia’s notorious oligarchs are powerless to voice their opinion about what is happening in the country, much less influence events in some way. Russia is run by individuals who couldn’t care less about assets in Europe or the U.S., opportunities to travel abroad or the upholding of humanitarian values.
Sure, sanctioning oligarchs for their *links* to the Putin regime makes perfect sense and is justified morally and politically, but let’s not kid ourselves that having those social “links” amounts to actual political *leverage* that’s going to change the course of the invasion. Nor let us think that autocratic regimes are anywhere near as beholden to the outrage and dissent of anyone outside the elite ruling circles as in our western societies.
Really, I’d say the most interesting thing about this “oligarchs are extremely rich so they must have significant political leverage” argument is that its logic applies much more to the kind of plutocratic or oligarchic political systems that we in many western countries have (their varying degrees of democratisation notwithstanding), rather than the kind of security autocracy that Russia has developed over the last twenty years or so.
FWIW, to the extent that any western sanction might really pressure Putin and the Kremlin to change course (not that I think any amount of coercion at this point will be enough to convince Putin that walking back and admitting loss would be worth it, not least because [there’s a lot of good evidence to suggest that sanctions just don’t work](https://twitter.com/njtmulder/status/1499145851918237698?cxt=HHwWhICyobTNhM4pAAAA)), I think it’s much more likely to be the freezing of Russia’s foreign currency reserves and the blacklisting of its central bank than anything we do to the oligarchs’ assets or their immigration status. Going after the oligarchs just pisses off the oligarchs and means at most Putin has to field some telephone calls with disgruntled rich guys; going after the central bank transforms Russia into a Venezuela, a Cuba, an Iran, or a North Korea. There are extremely serious questions to be had about the implications of that move and whether it’s a good idea — it amounts to no less than the weaponisation of globalisation itself, a really epochal transformation that’s happened in a mere matter of days — but there’s no doubt that’s what would really hurt the Kremlin and get their attention.
Fuck why have I spent so long responding to Alan in Fleet?
How do these guys get dual citizenship whereas I get my EU rights ripped away from me against my will?
Stripping citizenship is a Pandora’s box we really don’t to open. If they’ll do it for you, they’ll do it too you.
Any Russians with duel passports and citizenship get to have only one … choose.
What…and prevent the Tory’s partying in No 10…don’t be daft they’ll never stand for that, the Tory’s not the Oligarchs…
I initially interpreted this headline as, “Strip oligarchs such as Shamima Begum of their citizenship to end Putin’s invasion”, and for a moment, I was fully preparing to go off on one.
I HAVE RETUNRED!
​
​
No, Shamima Begum directly took action, she decided (Yes as a child she could be forgiven) to go to Syria to join ISIS (Brainwash) But what she decided to say later in an Interview sealed her fate, and the defence “BUT SHE WAS SURROUNDED BY ISIS” faded when she tried a more Western look and offered to out members of ISIS in a later Interview after her first failure of a Interview.
​
​
While Russian Oligarchs had no idea that someone else, I.E Putin would do something stupid, should we strip citizenship of Shamima Begum’s Parents based on her actions?
Shamima was groomed as a child. That’s not her fault (what about her parents, nobody questions her mum and dad over it…) I don’t think taking her passport was the right thing, but rehabilitation and intensive psychiatric evaluation would have been a start.
The government knew exactly what they were doing by handing British passports to Russian oligarchs. You can’t compare the two but I understand why people would.
I don’t agree with Shamima for the record, but I think they should have dealt with her in a different way.
12 comments
When I first read the headline, I read it as the caller was suggesting that Shamima Begum was an oligarch.
Another coffee for me I think!
>”We can take away the citizenship of people if they’re dual citizens. We’ve done it to Shamima Begum. Why don’t we say to the oligarchs effectively, if you are supporting Putin, you are effectively an enemy of the West?”
This just points the stage lights towards the fucked up morale character of the average Tory nutter.
Shamima Begum is a threat to the security of the UK says MI5 and MI6. A bit unfair making the same comparison with Russian Oligarchs.
OMFG. That is very unfair. Not all are like responsible for Putin. Like others, some are also caught in the middle.
A not great idea that is very unlikely to have the desired effect.
Let’s set aside for one moment the (in my view) very dangerous ramifications of turning citizenship from an inalienable status into a revocable privilege. Strategically, this idea just doesn’t make any sense. One of the major adverse effects of Putin’s invasion and the consequent western sanctions on Russian society is a surge in interest in leaving the country, especially among younger and more cosmopolitan Russians. Polling is very difficult in an autocratic country, but I saw a historian recently cite a figure of somewhere around *fifty-five percent* of Russians under thirty want to leave. If the goal of western nations here is to punish the Kremlin and deprive it of future prosperity, it makes much more sense to encourage such a brain drain, not undermine it by adopting such draconian measures as citizenship-revocation to those Russians already here.
More to the point, I think the political leverage of the oligarchs in Russia is pretty vastly overstated by many western commentators and pundits. Kremlin observers and analysts I’ve come across say that in Russia, political power really lies much more with a security-military elite than an economic elite, increasingly so under Putin’s regime. As Anatol Lieven wrote [just yesterday in the Washington Post](https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/03/04/russian-oligarchs-lack/),
>This is no longer the 1990s, when wealthy business owners dominated the Yeltsin regime. Under Putin, those former “oligarchs” who have pledged loyalty to him have been allowed to keep their wealth (until now), but they have no political power. That is exercised by a narrow circle of top officials and former officials appointed by Putin to control key sections of the energy sector. These men are drawn mainly from the former KGB. They have great wealth, but their primary loyalty is to Putin and the state.
A view shared by Andrey Movchan, who writes in the [independent liberal news outlet The Moscow Times](https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022/02/28/western-reaction-to-war-in-ukraine-plays-into-vladimir-putins-hands-a76644):
>Russia is the exact opposite of a developed Western country. Power in Russia rests on the accumulated capital earned from the sale of natural resources and hordes of siloviki are prepared to brutally suppress all democratic initiatives and attempts at resistance. Kremlin leaders don’t care about the standard of living or opinions of Russia’s citizens.They care only that they have the loyalty of several thousand senior officials and that two million siloviki receive a regular paycheck and,in return, are ready to defend the government. With authority centralized in this way, independent business and sources of capital are unimportant by definition, as are the country’s millions of managers,business people and professionals. All that matters is the extraction of natural resources and the ability to convert the income from their sale into villas, yachts and military might. […] Now, even Russia’s notorious oligarchs are powerless to voice their opinion about what is happening in the country, much less influence events in some way. Russia is run by individuals who couldn’t care less about assets in Europe or the U.S., opportunities to travel abroad or the upholding of humanitarian values.
Sure, sanctioning oligarchs for their *links* to the Putin regime makes perfect sense and is justified morally and politically, but let’s not kid ourselves that having those social “links” amounts to actual political *leverage* that’s going to change the course of the invasion. Nor let us think that autocratic regimes are anywhere near as beholden to the outrage and dissent of anyone outside the elite ruling circles as in our western societies.
Really, I’d say the most interesting thing about this “oligarchs are extremely rich so they must have significant political leverage” argument is that its logic applies much more to the kind of plutocratic or oligarchic political systems that we in many western countries have (their varying degrees of democratisation notwithstanding), rather than the kind of security autocracy that Russia has developed over the last twenty years or so.
FWIW, to the extent that any western sanction might really pressure Putin and the Kremlin to change course (not that I think any amount of coercion at this point will be enough to convince Putin that walking back and admitting loss would be worth it, not least because [there’s a lot of good evidence to suggest that sanctions just don’t work](https://twitter.com/njtmulder/status/1499145851918237698?cxt=HHwWhICyobTNhM4pAAAA)), I think it’s much more likely to be the freezing of Russia’s foreign currency reserves and the blacklisting of its central bank than anything we do to the oligarchs’ assets or their immigration status. Going after the oligarchs just pisses off the oligarchs and means at most Putin has to field some telephone calls with disgruntled rich guys; going after the central bank transforms Russia into a Venezuela, a Cuba, an Iran, or a North Korea. There are extremely serious questions to be had about the implications of that move and whether it’s a good idea — it amounts to no less than the weaponisation of globalisation itself, a really epochal transformation that’s happened in a mere matter of days — but there’s no doubt that’s what would really hurt the Kremlin and get their attention.
Fuck why have I spent so long responding to Alan in Fleet?
How do these guys get dual citizenship whereas I get my EU rights ripped away from me against my will?
Stripping citizenship is a Pandora’s box we really don’t to open. If they’ll do it for you, they’ll do it too you.
Any Russians with duel passports and citizenship get to have only one … choose.
What…and prevent the Tory’s partying in No 10…don’t be daft they’ll never stand for that, the Tory’s not the Oligarchs…
I initially interpreted this headline as, “Strip oligarchs such as Shamima Begum of their citizenship to end Putin’s invasion”, and for a moment, I was fully preparing to go off on one.
I HAVE RETUNRED!
​
​
No, Shamima Begum directly took action, she decided (Yes as a child she could be forgiven) to go to Syria to join ISIS (Brainwash) But what she decided to say later in an Interview sealed her fate, and the defence “BUT SHE WAS SURROUNDED BY ISIS” faded when she tried a more Western look and offered to out members of ISIS in a later Interview after her first failure of a Interview.
​
​
While Russian Oligarchs had no idea that someone else, I.E Putin would do something stupid, should we strip citizenship of Shamima Begum’s Parents based on her actions?
Shamima was groomed as a child. That’s not her fault (what about her parents, nobody questions her mum and dad over it…) I don’t think taking her passport was the right thing, but rehabilitation and intensive psychiatric evaluation would have been a start.
The government knew exactly what they were doing by handing British passports to Russian oligarchs. You can’t compare the two but I understand why people would.
I don’t agree with Shamima for the record, but I think they should have dealt with her in a different way.