Hello everyone, interpret the major events in the world and explore the root causes of the incident. Welcome to follow, Mo Jiajun.
Imagine, will you be sanctioned by the United States in your lifetime?
Don’t laugh, don’t think this is a 100% impossible thing. Of course, it is unlikely that the United States will directly call the sanctions. However, the United States has a weapon of killing, called secondary sanctions, which can affect a large number of people. As long as anyone or business is deemed to have a "minimum connection" with the United States, the laws and regulations of US economic sanctions will apply to this person or business and become the target of secondary sanctions.
You may think that I have no contact with the United States, don’t worry, this “minimum contact” is really very low, so low that it is beyond your imagination. Maybe you and I will meet it. And according to the current crazy sanctions by the United States, maybe one day we may really “please bring sanctions”!
So what are the requirements for the object and scope of US sanctions? What are the solutions after being sanctioned by the United States? Today we will talk about the origin, application of , and the methods of of the US sub-sanctions, and how my country and other countries respond to it at present. Friends who like it, please like and follow it and recommend it to more people! Thank you everyone! By the way, if any friend has been sanctioned, remember to come to the comment section to make a fuss!
Below, we start the main film.
The United States’ sub-sanctions are intended to prohibit individuals and entities from third countries from engaging in certain specific interactions with sanctioned countries. This can not only force third countries to take the same sanctions as the United States, but also transform unilateral sanctions into multilateral behaviors. At the same time, it can also undermine the economic order of third countries and affect the social stability of third countries.
During the Cold War, the United States was able to rampant the world with primary sanctions. But after the 1990s, the process of economic globalization continued to accelerate, and the supply chain and industrial chain were scattered all over the world. In this case, sanctions on a country are useless by relying on the United States alone, so the effect of primary sanctions was greatly reduced and the purpose of completely cutting off the foreign ties of the sanctioned countries was not achieved. Therefore, the United States began to impose secondary sanctions on the outside, directly sanctioning enterprises and individuals from other countries, forcing the whole world to cut off the sanctioned countries together.
Sub-sanctions are a situation that applies outside the U.S. law. The theoretical source of application outside the U.S. law is the principle of "minimum connection" determined in 1955.
Based on the principle of "minimum connection", any third-country enterprise or individual will be regarded as having a "minimum connection" with the United States as long as one of the following situations occurs, and then it will be governed by US laws like Americans and must comply with US sanctions: First, the US financial system is used or the US dollar is used; Second, the products or technologies traded are from the United States, or the products or technologies traded contain a certain proportion of American components; Third, the enterprises are owned or controlled by Americans; Fourth, the funds applicable to the trading activities come from the US financial market or investors.
When you see this, you should understand why the "minimum contact" at the beginning of the video is very low. The main reason is that the first one is that if you have changed the US dollar or used the US dollar, then you will meet the "minimum contact" and the US extraterritorial law can control you. I believe that many friends who go abroad to travel, work and study have been shot.
So, everyone should pay attention. Isn’t Russia now being sanctioned by the United States? If you have used US dollars and then you have bought Siberian Forest Cat imported from Russia, Siberian Husky imported from Russia, chocolate purple candy imported from Russia, or used fertilizers imported from Russia, natural gas , and firewood, then you may have violated the US sanctions order. In theory, the United States can sanction you. This is called secondary sanctions.
I don’t know if you guys who are watching the video match it. Anyway, I have met it. I haven’t finished eating the chocolate I bought in the first half of the year.
Of course, technically speaking, the United States may not have so much spare time to sanction ordinary people like me, unless this video is played over 100 million and is popular all over the Internet, with a great influence that the United States cannot ignore, which may be a little troublesome.
It can be seen from this that the scope of application of US secondary sanctions has been very wide. However, the United States is not satisfied yet, and he invented another "principle of effect". Originally, the "Principle of Effect" applies to criminal cases, which means that no matter whether the crime occurs in the United States or not, as long as the crime has a direct and substantial impact on the United States, it can break the boundaries of judicial jurisdiction and conduct transnational law enforcement. Now, the United States defines normal trade transactions as criminal acts, so that all third-country enterprises and individuals who have no connection with the United States can also be included in the scope of their application of economic sanctions laws and regulations.
secondary sanctions were widely used during the term of Trump’s . He first issued the “Counterattack on the United States with Sanctions Act” and issued Executive Order No. 13846, which “is not only aimed at third-country enterprises that directly engage in business with Iranian enterprises, but also aimed at other third-country enterprises that have business with third-country enterprises that have been included in sanctions for conducting Iran’s business.”
says that Trump communicates with Russia, and there is a certain reason. At least he must have played with Russian nesting dolls very well. This layer can be completed and can be endlessly cycled.
So, if I am "unfortunately" sanctioned, what are the consequences?
There are three main types of ways to apply US economic sanctions, namely economic embargo, trade restrictions and financial sanctions, and the most important one is the latter two. Among them, the trade restrictions are relatively single, mainly through the US Treasury Department's Foreign Assets Supervision Office on the United States Treasury's Foreign Assets Supervision and Administration Office. The third type of financial sanctions is more diverse, mainly including the following three types:
Article 1, freezing assets. For third-country businesses and individuals included in the scope of subsidies, the U.S. government will usually include them on an SDN list, and then you will ban trade with any Americans while being frozen in assets. Asset freezing refers to the fact that third countries, their enterprises and individuals "prohibit the use of all property and property interests located in the United States or controlled by Americans, and prohibit the withdrawal, transfer, payment, transaction, export or any form of disposal" to reduce the cash flow that can be used on the books of the sanctioned target, affect the projects under construction and reduce the expected profits. In this regard, given that the up owner is too poor, he has 0 assets in the United States and has not saved money in , Bank of America , so he is not afraid at all.
The second item is to cut off the channels for using US dollars. The US dollar payment and settlement of International Trade is mainly carried out through two systems: CHIPS (New York Clearing House Interbank Payment System) and SWIFT (Global Interbank Financial Telecommunications Association). SWIFT operates a world-class financial telegram network that supports financial exchanges in global and local markets, while CHIPS is mainly used for cross-border dollar transaction clearing. In the CHIPS system, foreign financial institutions must use the model of "becoming a member bank of CHIPS, participating bank or opening interbank accounts at the above-mentioned banks" to enable third-country enterprises and individuals to complete the liquidation of US dollars by themselves.
Therefore, in order to sanction third-country enterprises and individuals and cut off their use of the US dollar, the United States strictly restricts or directly prohibits foreign financial institutions from opening or maintaining agency accounts or connecting accounts in the United States, making it impossible for third-country enterprises and individuals to complete US dollar liquidation through foreign financial institutions and are excluded from the US financial system. The impact of
on ordinary people may be mainly that it will be more troublesome to go abroad to work, travel and study in the future, because you cannot exchange US dollars through legal channels, and people who like overseas shopping cannot trade in US dollars.
Article 3: The United States requires public funds controlled by state and below governments to withdraw capital from third-country enterprises that are subject to secondary sanctions. For example, the Comprehensive Sanctions against Iran, Accountability and Disinvestment Act stipulates that investment must be drawn from enterprises investing in the Iranian energy industry and institutions that provide financial services to the Iranian energy industry.On November 4, 2018, France's Total Company withdrew from the natural gas project jointly established with China National Petroleum Corporation and Iranian Petroleum Corporation because of fear of withdrawal of investment by US investors.
Speaking of this, we must face a reality. Although the up owner should, may, and may not be sanctioned by the United States, at present, our country is indeed under increasing US sub-sanctions. Especially energy companies are the first to be affected.
In July 2019, China's Zhuhai Zhenrong Group was included in the SDN list for importing crude oil from Iran. Two months later, China Petroleum Co., Ltd., Kunlun Shipping Co., Ltd., Pegasus 88 Co., Ltd. and Dalian COSCO Ocean Oil Transport Crew Ship Management Co., Ltd. were all included in the SDN list for conducting crude oil trade with Iran. At the beginning of 2020, Shandong Qiwangda Petrochemical Co., Ltd. and Zhongxiang Petrochemical Co., Ltd. were also included in the SDN list for conducting crude oil trade with Iran, etc.
Foreign financing of Chinese enterprises has also been affected by US sub-sanctions. For example, under the Florida Investment Protection Act, 35 Chinese companies were withdrawn as of the end of 2019. Among them, China National Offshore Oil Co., Ltd. was withdrawn by US$132 million, China National Petroleum Co., Ltd. was withdrawn by US$38 million, and China National Petroleum and Chemical Corporation was withdrawn by US$26 million. ,
In addition, the sanctions method of US capital withdrawal also has a certain impact on the listing of Chinese companies. Many companies choose to list in Hong Kong or abroad, but because the United States prohibits American investors from investing in sanctioned companies, Americans cannot buy stocks of sanctioned companies. This has led to many securities markets putting forward quite strict compliance requirements for companies that intend to be listed. For example, the Hong Kong Stock Exchange requires the listed company to terminate or transfer the business of the targeted sanctions before listing.
So, after being put on the list of secondary sanctions, how can we get out?
The first method is to obtain the presidential immunity of the United States. This difficulty is not very high. A third country needs to consult with the US president through diplomatic channels, or the US president is forced to impose exemptions on third-country enterprises and individuals under pressure from the international community. For example, in 1996, the US Congress asked President Clinton to impose secondary sanctions on third-country companies that invest in Iran and Libya oil. However, due to strong opposition from EU , Clinton exempted EU companies after multiple diplomatic negotiations. In 2016, under pressure from the international community, Obama also stopped sub-sanctions related to Iran by exercising immunity.
But, Chinese companies and individuals have never obtained this immunity.
The second method is to argue with WTO . But in practice, relying on the WTO dispute resolution mechanism cannot solve the problem of US subsidy. Because the WTO cannot control the United States.
The third method is to punish sanctions. It sounds quite satisfying, but we ourselves will suffer losses.
So, what should I do to the best?
The EU provides a very classic case - the Iranian National Bank case suing Deutsche Telecom. In this case, the EU rarely faces the United States.
In May 2018, the United States unilaterally withdrew from the Iran nuclear agreement , comprehensively strengthening primary and secondary sanctions on Iran. On November 5, 2018, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Overseas Assets Control put the Iranian state-owned bank, the National Bank of Iran, on the SDN list, freezing the bank’s assets under the U.S. jurisdiction, which means that third-country entities that deal with the bank may be subject to U.S. sub-sanctions.
Before this, Deutsche Telecom Co., Ltd. had signed an framework agreement with the German branch of the National Bank of Iran to provide internal and external communication facilities. After the United States announced secondary sanctions, Deutsche Telecom issued a notice to the Iranian National Bank informing it that all contracts between the two parties would be terminated immediately.
The reason given by Deutsche Telekom is that if I continue to cooperate with you, I may be included in the US SDN list, and I will be finished myself. So, my friend, I'm sorry, let's forget each other in the world.
But the problem is that the Iranian National Bank does not want to forget and is not convinced. They filed a lawsuit in the Hamburg District Court in Germany, asking the court to rule that Deutsche Telekom uphold the contract.
Guess what the German court will make a judgment? Is it a legitimate demand for supporting Iranians ? Or admit defeat?
Please note that this is the Merkel ruled Germany, not the 2022 Germany.
Iran Central Bank
At that time, the EU issued a "Protection Act against Third-Country Legislation and Extraterritorial Application Impacts for Action", referred to as the "EU Blocking Regulations", which prohibits enterprises and individuals from complying with US evil laws. It means that EU companies and individuals are not allowed to obey the US sanctions order. If you follow me, then I will punish you. I can’t cure the United States, can’t cure you?
According to this bill, Deutsche Telekom obviously violated the EU Blocking Regulations and should be severely punished.
The Hamburg District Court then began the classic and muddy. It ruled that Deutsche Telekom must perform existing contracts and can only terminate the contract normally when the contract notice expires. But at the same time, it was also determined that he did not violate the EU Blocking Regulations and there was no need for punishment.
Iranian National Bank was dissatisfied with the verdict and believed that Deutsche Telecom should be severely punished, so he appealed to the Hanseatic High District Court. The Hanseatic High District Court felt that the case was too deep and I, a little devil, could not bear it, so I kicked the ball to the European Court for trial.
There was indeed a lot of controversy within the EU at that time. Because the plaintiff Iran National Bank is a foreign party sanctioned by the United States, while the defendant Deutsche Telecom is an EU company and is his own person. Secondly, Deutsche Telecom has important businesses in the US market, with its group having 50,000 employees in the US, and its business volume in the US market accounts for nearly 50% of its turnover. If it is sanctioned by the US sub-level, then all the US business will be ruined and may even go bankrupt.
So, in the National Bank case, if the European Court of Justice supports the plaintiff's lawsuit, it will benefit the Iranians and make EU companies suffer a great loss.
However, the European Court of Justice really made a verdict in favor of the Iranian bank.
The EU does this to kill the chicken and warn the monkey. As mentioned earlier, the EU's "Blocking Law" is to confront US sub-sanctions head-on, and the key to whether the blocking law can take effect is four words: prohibiting compliance: prohibiting our companies from abiding by the US's evil laws. The obligation of "prohibiting compliance" is the core obligation of the Blocking Law. If all companies kneel down to the United States in a cowardly manner and we cannot continue to punish ourselves, the Blocking Law will become a piece of paper. So Deutsche Telecom was very unlucky and became the first offering of the blocking method.
Of course, you can feel that the most difficult thing to do here is the enterprise, because it either complies with its own blocking laws and violates US laws and is subject to US sanctions; or complies with US laws and violates its own blocking laws and is subject to domestic laws and is subject to domestic laws and is subject to domestic laws and is subject to domestic laws and is subject to domestic laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and is subject to US laws and regulations. This was like the rats in the bellows being angry.
The unlucky Deutsche Telecom
In fact, many countries in the world have similar blocking methods in order to deal with the sub-sanctions of the United States. However, after formulating the blocking law, it is often difficult to truly implement and implement it because considering that if enterprises are really forced to fulfill the obligation of "prohibited compliance", it will definitely cause inevitable losses to their own enterprises, so all countries are very cautious when using the blocking law. Either firmly implement the Blocking Law and strictly hold companies that violate the Blocking Law accountable; or try to avoid triggering the application of the Blocking Law, which is equivalent to admitting defeat to the United States.
This time the EU has taken action against its own company. However, this represents the EU's interests in Iran, which is far greater than the interests of a company. It is precisely because the EU has made the determination to fight the United States to the end this time, which has made the United States coward and is willing to sit down and learn to speak human language.
The cases provide us with a new idea.On January 9, 2021, my country also announced and implemented the " Measures for Blocking Foreign Laws and Measures Improper External Application " (hereinafter referred to as the "Measures for Blocking"). The content is mainly divided into the following four aspects: First, refusal to recognize judgments and rulings made by foreign laws within the ban; Second, prohibiting Chinese citizens, legal persons or other organizations from complying with foreign laws within the ban, otherwise they will face punishment; Third, allowing Chinese citizens, legal persons or other organizations to sue and claim compensation for losses caused by complying with foreign laws or measures within the ban; Fourth, allowing Chinese citizens, legal persons or other organizations to apply for exemption from complying with the ban on the grounds of their own legitimate rights and interests and national rights and interests.
From the content, my country's "Blocking Measures" is not much different from the EU Blocking Measures. So the key to whether it can be effective is whether to make up your mind and beat your own children. Judging from the EU's practice, it is extremely important to prohibit domestic companies and individuals from complying with US laws. If the punishment is too light, it will be useless. Especially for some large enterprises, the benefits obtained by complying with US laws are far greater than the painless punishment in China. It is conceivable how he will choose. But excessive punishment is unfair to the company. After all, it is "his own kid", so there is no need to be disabled. Therefore, we should indeed learn from the lessons of the EU, pay attention to the punishment methods and law enforcement efforts, and strive to find a balance between protecting the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises and realizing the original intention of designing the Blocking Law.
In addition to this, my country should also add prohibited measures for external communications to the blocking method. The U.S. "HTM2 Patriot Act" and "Cloud Act" allow U.S. law enforcement agencies to collect all kinds of information and data around the world as they wish, placing many countries, organizations, companies and individuals under the jurisdiction of the empire. In this regard, France is ahead in legislation. They have an Foreign Communication Law that blocks the United States from obtaining information and evidence for prosecution through French citizens, legal representatives or lawyers. my country is also facing the " long-arm jurisdiction " in the judicial field of the United States. Although there are some legal provisions in my country's current laws that can hinder the United States from collecting and investigating evidence in my country, it has not been effectively implemented in practice and has not played a real role. Therefore, it is necessary to make up for this shortcoming.
OK, so that’s all for today. See you next time. I wish you all.
Reference: Strict approach to the implementation of the
Blocking Law——European Court of Justice Iran Melli The enlightenment of the bank case to China_Chen Ruohong
China's countermeasures against US subsidy_Tang Yes
US secondary sanctions and international response _China Institute of Modern International Relations Research Group; Huang Ying
How Chinese companies respond to US economic sanctions _Li Sha
US extraterritorial jurisdiction issues_Wang Dong
