heh, that was a power user error.
Any list would look puny next to that list and everyone knows it. The world knows it.
The world disagrees with you.
Here’s a report on a UN condemnation of Russian human rights violations.
Here’s a report on current human rights violations in Russia by Human Rights Watch.
You know, I still would like an answer but don’t ever expect to get it, as to “why do Americans expect other countries’ laws to be identical to their own?” You guys keep doing it. You pass a specific law allowing the seizure of assets in a specific case, every other country must also do it (never mind that a lot of them consider that law redundant and unnecessary). Someone in the US comes up with a bill to allow homeless children to attend school, you expect Norway (which begins by trying to house those kids yesterday) and Ghana (which is busy trying to build schools) to pass one too.
If our laws were identical to yours - we’d be you.
Those cites do not contradict my claim.
This went off track.
The Magnitsky act is designed to make it harder for Putin to stash billions of dollars overseas which he uses to keep his regime afloat.
I know it was passed due to human rights, but the financial aspects are paramount.
With Putin’s Russia interfering with the democracies of various western countries, why aren’t the NATO countries joining together to all pass Magnitsky acts? If an attack on one NATO country is an attack on them all, why isn’t Putin messing with the democracies in France, the US, UK, Germany, Estonia, etc. cause for NATO to get together and all pass the Magnitsky act to freeze Putin’s assets?
Heavy taxation? That is your idea of oppression?
Also how do sanctions count as a human rights abuse?
I will grant CIA kidnappings and torture are illegal. We signed various laws saying we wouldn’t do that.
And the US is a war hungry nation. But you can’t compare the US’s domestic human rights to a dictatorship.
Passing a law sanctioning highly placed individuals in another country because of suspected internal corruption and murder in that country is a novel /rare approach.
I see Russia’s version of this law names 28 Americans, most concerned with human rights abuses as Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib:
The geopolitics for NATO members in Europe is somewhat different than the United States and Canada. Intelligence agencies for those countries would likely expect some form of retaliation from Russia for passing the Magnitsky Act. They have to weigh their cyber security strength, internal divisive social issues, and internal political extremists, on both ends of the spectrum, before introducing a bill that would instigate a cyber disinformation and propaganda war against them.
I don’t want to call other nation-states Russian appeasers. A rot of democratic ideals may be deep in North America and Europe, because people have been bought and/or blackmailed. I am guessing, though. Your question is a good one.
And, again, so are our legal systems.
For several of those countries, a Magnitsky Act would be:
redundant, in that it covers things which are already covered,
and/or illegal, if it allowed seizure without proper investigation.
So again, why should those countries pass such a law?
There are plenty of EU sanctions in place on Russia as a result of the annexation of Crimea. They target individuals, companies and banks, restricting visas and access to finance and markets.
The latest US sanctions, retaliation for Russian interference in US elections, is a problem for Europe because some of the provisions will cost Europe very dear.
Much of middle and eastern Europe is very dependent on gas piped from Russia. Russia is also very dependent on getting paid for the gas. That mutual interest keeps any situation with Russia from escalating too far. Germany is the biggest economy in Europe and its energy policy is most at threat from any restriction in Russian Gas. That gas heats homes and supplies power stations.
There is a big LNG terminal being build in Lithuania and the US is beginning to export Liquid Natural Gas to Europe to give Russia a run for its money. US expansion in this market is very significant, some EU countries are very anxious to reduce dependence on Russia, for example Poland. So there is a debate with in the EU about what is the best strategy, Poland and the Baltic countries are not at all happy with the Baltic pipeline direct from Russia to Germany. Other states, like the UK, are less affected by the Russian Gas issue. Now if the US was to sell LNG at cheaper price to the EU than Russia does…Energy policy and the billions of dollars exchanged between countries to keep the lights on tends to trump many other political issues.
Russia is not some isolated, resourceless country like North Korea, it is a major oil and gas supplier and sanctions stand to hurt the EU far more than the US.
Meanwhile, behind the scenes, just about every democratic country is bolstering their cyber defences against the sabotage of elections. That lesson, has been learned, I am sure. No-one wants to another Trump or Brexit.
It is a new level in the geopolitical game of chess.