Market manipulation is a deliberate attempt to interfere with the free and fair operation of the market and create artificial, false or misleading appearances with respect to the price of, or market for, a security, commodity or currency. Market manipulation is prohibited in most countries, in particular, it is prohibited in the United States under Section 9(a)(2) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, in Australia under Section 1041A of the Corporations Act 2001, and in Israel under Section 54(a) of the securities act of 1968. The Act defines market manipulation as transactions which create an artificial price or maintain an artificial price for a tradeable security. Market manipulation i s also prohibited for wholesale electricity markets under Section 222 of the Federal Power Act and wholesale natural gas markets under Section 4A of the Natural Gas Act.

Examples

• Pools: "Agreements, often written, among a group of traders to delegate authority to a single manager to trade in a specific stock for a specific period of time and then to share in the resulting profits or losses."
• Churning: "When a trader places both buy and sell orders at about the same price. The increase in activity is intended to attract additional investors, and increase the price."
• Stock Bashing: "This scheme is usually orchestrated by savvy online message board posters (a.k.a. "Bashers") who make up false and/or misleading information about the target company in an attempt to get shares for a cheaper price. This activity, in most cases, is conducted by posting libelous posts on multiple public forums. The perpetrators sometimes work directly for unscrupulous Investor Relations firms who have convertible notes that convert for more shares the lower the bid or ask price is; thus the lower these Bashers can drive a stock price down by trying to convince shareholders they have bought a worthless security, the more shares the Investor Relations firm receives as compensation. Immediately after the stock conversion is complete and shares are issued to the Investor Relations firm, consultant, attorney or similar party, the basher/s then become friends of the company and move quickly to ensure they profit on a classic Pump & Dump scheme to liquidate their ill g otten shares. (see P&D)"
• Pump and dump: "This scheme is generally part of a more complex grand plan of market manipulation on the targeted security. The Perpetrators (Usually stock promoters) convince company affiliates and large position non-affiliates to release shares into a free trading status as "Payment" for services for promoting the security. Instead of putting out legitimate information about a company the promoter sends out bogus e-mails (the "Pump") to millions of unsophisticated investors (Sometimes called "Retail Investors") in an attempt to drive the price of the stock and volume to higher points. After they accomplish both, the promoter sells their shares (the "Dump") and the stock price falls like a stone, taking all the duped investors money with it."
• Runs: "When a group of traders create activity or rumors in order to drive the price of a security up." An example is the Guinness share-trading fraud of the 1980s. In the US, this activity is usually referred to as painting the tape. Runs may also occur when trader(s) are attempting to drive the price of a certain share down, although this is rare. (see Stock Bashing)"
• Ramping (the market): "Actions designed to artificially raise the market price of listed securities and to give the impression of voluminous trading, in order to make a quick profit."
• Wash trade: "Selling and repurchasing the same or substantially the same security for the purpose of generating activity and increasing the price".
• Bear raid: "Attempting to push the price of a stock down by heavy selling or short selling."
• Lure and Squeeze: This works with a company that is very distressed on paper, with impossibly high debt and consistently high annual losses, but very few assets, making it look as if bankruptcy must be imminent. The stock price gradually falls as people new to the stock short it on the basis of the poor outlook for the company, until the number of shorted shares greatly exceeds the total number of shares that are not held by those aware of the lure and squeeze scheme (call them "people in the know"). In the meantime, people in the know increasingly purchase the stock as it drops to lower and lower prices. When the short interest has reached a maximum, the company announces it has made a deal with its creditors to settle its loans in exchange for shares of stock (or some similar kind of arrangement that leverages the stock price to benefit the company), knowing that those who have short positions will be squeezed as the price of the stock sky-rockets. Near its peak price, people i n the know start to sell, and the price gradually falls back down again for the cycle to repeat.
• Quote stuffing is a tactic employed by high-frequency traders that involves using specialized, high-bandwidth hardware to quickly enter and withdraw large quantities of orders in an attempt to flood the market, thereby gaining an advantage over slower market participants.

References

Learn more »

Home economics or domestic science, now known as family and consumer sciences (FCS), is the profession and field of study that deals with the economics and management of the home and community. The field deals with the relationship between individuals, families, and communities, and the environment in which they live.

As a subject of study, FCS is taught in secondary schools, colleges and universities, vocational schools, and in adult education centers; students include women and men. It prepares students for homemaking or professional careers, or to assist in preparing to fulfill real-life responsibilities at home. As an academic profession, it includes educators in the field and human services professionals.

The field represents many disciplines including consumer science, nutrition, food preparation, parenting, early childhood education, family economics, human development, interior design, textiles, apparel design, as well as other related subjects. Family and Consumer Sciences education focuses on individuals and families living in society throughout their lifespan, thus dealing not only with families but also with their interrelationships with the communities. Other topics such as sexual education, and fire prevention may also be covered.

Name

Family and consumer science was previously known in the United Sates as home economics (often abbreviated "home ec" or "HE"). In 1994, various organizations, including the American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences, adopted the new term "family and consumer science" to reflect the fact that the field covers aspects outside of home life and wellness.

The field is also known by other names, including human sciences, home science, and domestic economy. In addition, home economics has a strong historical relationship to the field of human ecology, and since the 1960s a number of university-level home economics programs have been renamed "human ecology" programs, including Cornell University's program, among others.

History

One of the first to champion the economics of running a home was Catherine Beecher, sister to Harriet Beecher Stowe. Catherine and Harriet both were leaders in mid-19th century North America in talking about domestic science. They came from a very religious family that valued education especially for women.

The Morrill Act of 1862 propelled domestic science further ahead as land grant colleges sought to educate farm wives in running their households as their husbands were being educated in agricultural methods and processes. Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Illinois, Minnesota and Michigan were early leaders offering programs for women. There were women graduates of these institutions several years before the Lake Placid Conferences which gave birth to the home economics movement.

The home economics movement started with Ellen Swallow Richards, who was the first woman to attend Massachusetts Institute of Technology and later became the first female instructor. Through her chemistry research, she became an expert in water quality and later began to focus on applying scientific principles to domestic situations. At the Chicago World’s Fair in 1893, she designed the Rumford Kitchen, which was a tiny kitchen that served nutritious meals to thousands of fair goers, along with a healthy dose of nutrition education. She shunned an invitation to participate in the Women’s Building as she said none of her research was just women’s work, but rather information for all.

Late in the 19th century, Richards convened a group of contemporaries to discuss the essence of domestic science and how the elements of this discipline would ultimately improve the quality of life for many individuals and families. They met at pristine Lake Placid, New York at the invitation of Melvil Dewey. Over the course of the next 10 years, these educators worked tirelessly to elevate the discipline, which was to become home economics, to a legitimate profession. Richards wanted to call this oekology or the science of right living. Euthenics, the science of controllable environment, was also a name of her choice, but "home economics" was ultimately chosen as the official term in 1899. Richards then founded the American Home Economics Association (now called the American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences) in 1909.

In the 1910s the AHEA won passage of two crucial pieces of legislation that allowed home economists to establish formal niches for research and teaching within institutions of higher education. The Smith-Lever Act of 1914 and the Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 provided funding to expand demonstration work in rural communities and to develop and teach a home economics curriculum on the campuses of most state land-grant colleges. This legislation contributed to the creation of the Office of Home Economics, which grew into the Bureau of Home Economics, at the US Department of Agriculture during the early 20th century.

Home economics emerged at the turn of the twentieth century as a movement to train women to be more efficient household managers. At the same moment, American families began to consume many more goods and services than they produced. To guide women in this transition, professional home economics had two major goals: to teach women to assume their new roles as modern consumers and to communicate homemakers’ needs to manufacturers and political leaders. The development of the profession progressed from its origins as an educational movement to its identity as a source of consumer expertise in the interwar period to its virtual disappearance by the 1970s.

In the 19th century, home economics classes were intended to ready young women for their duties in the home in healthy environments. Classes were first offered in the United States, Canada, Germany and Great Britain, followed by Latin America, Asia, and Africa. International organizations such as those associated with the United Nations have been involved in starting home economics programs around the world.

Through the 1940s Iowa State College (later University) was the only program granting a master of science in household equipment. However, this program was centered on the ideals that women should acquire practical skills but also a scientifically based understanding of how technology in the household works. For example, women were required to disassemble and then reassemble kitchen machinery so they could understand basic operations as well as repair the equipment. In doing so, Iowa State effectively created culturally acceptable forms of physics and engineering for women in an era when these pursuits were not generally accessible to them.

Home economists … found a receptive audience among many of its young female members who expressed interest in learning about how to improve their homes, spend their leisure time, and make decisions about what to buy, what to make at home, and even what books to read.

A Standards Committee’s proposal in 1924 changed the AHEA constitution allowing for a special voting membership section clearing the way for HEIB (Home Economists in Business) section. The largest group of HEIB members worked for food companies such as Washburn Crosby (later General Mills), Kellogg’s, ..or trade associations charged with promoting particular foods such as the Institute of American Meat Packers and the National Dairy Council. [Some] worked as journalists for women’s magazines such as.. the Ladies’ Home Journal. [Others] worked for utility companies.

The function that home economists have been performing for more than a century remains key to our experiences as consumers, but the professional identity has disappeared. Indeed, efforts to reposition the discipline ultimately led to its renaming in the late twentieth century. In 1994, “home economics” was replaced by “family and consumer science.”…This renaming signaled a formal break from the field’s association with domesticity, highlighting instead issues of “family” and “consumption.”

A new actor that rose to prominence in the 1980s was the charismatic celebrity unaligned with home economists or any other professional group. Martha Stewart and her fellow “domestic celebrities,” in television programs, books, magazines, and websites, attest to the continued importance of independent experts and commercial mass-media organizations in facilitating technological and cultural change in consumer products and services industries.

To a great degree, Americans today tap into values once enshrined in a home economics curriculum to express a national identity and assert a standard of living that is distinct not only from Third World cultures but also from the cultures of other industrialized nations.... Even as luxury consumption exerts a cultural pull for many, middle-class culture still celebrates consumers who make sensible, controlled choices in the marketplace, resisting pure pleasure, impulse purchases, and cheap or shoddy goods.

By country

FCS is taught worldwide, both as an elective or as a required course in secondary education, and in many tertiary and continuing education institutions. Sometimes it is also taught in primary education. International cooperation in the field is coordinated by the International Federation for Home Economics, established in 1908.

Germany

Between 1880 and 1900, the Reifenstein schools concept was initiated by Ida von Kortzfleisch, a Prussian noble woman and early German feminist. Reifenstein refers to Reifenstein im Eichsfeld, a municipality in Thuringia and site of the first permanent school. Reifensteiner Verband comprised from 1897 till 1990 about 15 own schools and cooperated with further operators. About 40 wirtschaftliche Frauenschulen, rural economist women schools were connected to the Reifensteiner concept and movement and allowed higher education for women already in the German Kaiserreich. The 1913 doctorate of Johannes Kramer compared different concepts of home economic education worldwide and praised the system e.g. in Iowa.

South Korea

In South Korea, the field is most commonly known as "family studies" or "family science" (가정과학, gajeong-gwahak). The field began in schools taught by Western missionaries in the late 19th century. The first college-level department of family science was established at Ewha Womans University in Seoul in 1929.

United States

In the United States, approximately 5 million students in US secondary education take FCS each year.

Home science in India

Many Education boards in India such as NIOS, CBSE, ICSE, CISCE and various state boards offer home science as a subject in their courses.

Content

Situated in the human sciences, home economics draws from a range of disciplines to achieve optimal and sustainable living for individuals, families, and communities. Historically, home economics has been in the context of the home and household, but this has extended in the 21st century to include the wider living environments as we better understand that the capacities, choices, and priorities of individuals and families impact at all levels, ranging from the household to the local and the global community. Home economists are concerned with promoting and protecting the well-being of individuals, families, and communities; they facilitate the development of attributes for lifelong learning for paid, unpaid, and voluntary work. Home economics professionals are advocates for individuals, families, and communities.

The content of home economics comes from the synthesis of multiple disciplines. This interdisciplinary knowledge is essential because the phenomena and challenges of everyday life are not typically one-dimensional. The content of home economics courses vary, but may include: food, nutrition, and health; personal finance; family resource management and planning; textiles and clothing; shelter and housing; consumerism and consumer science; household management; design and technology; food science and hospitality; human development and family studies; education and community services, among others. The capacity to draw from such disciplinary diversity is a strength of the profession, allowing for the development of specific interpretations of the field, as relevant to the context.

Cleaning

Home cleaning tasks can be separated into four categories: litter removal, storage of belongings, dusting, and washing of surfaces. Washing of surfaces is the most dangerous and complicated part because of the cleaning solutions. For example, hard water deposits are cleaned with acid solutions and grease is cleaned with alkaline solutions; they can both harm the skin and are reactive toward each other, potentially producing unwanted by-products. Mixing together chlorine bleach and strong acids (e.g. limescale remover containing HCl) forms chlorine gas, which is toxic. Solvents such as paint thinner and rubbing alcohol are toxic and flammable. Some disinfectants are toxic. Even dish water can require rubber gloves.

Finances

Dealing with finances is a key element of home economics. Understanding concepts such as debt, credit, loaning, interest rates and so on are important to having a healthy economic home. Life skills such as making a budget, keeping financial records and making frugal purchasing choices are all part of this subject area. As home economics is a very holistic field, one must also incorporate concepts like purchasing power and how consumers can affect the global world.

Professional associations

The AAFCS (American Association of Family & Consumer Sciences) represents teachers, educators, cooperatives, business, designers and nutritionists.The American Association of Family & Consumer Sciences (AAFCS) is the only national forum where K-12 teachers, university educators, and corporate executives collaborate to improve the quality of individual and family life.

The Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE) is the largest American national education association dedicated to the advancement of education that prepared youth and adults for successful careers. ACTE's core purpose is to provide leadership in developing an educated, prepared, and competitive workforce. The ACTE division of Family and Consumer Sciences Education includes three sections (1) NATFACS - National Association Teachers of Family and Consumer Sciences (2) NATEFACS - National Association Teacher Educators of Family andy Consumer Sciences, andy (3) NASAFACS - National Association State Administrators of Family and Consumer Sciences.

The National Council on Family Relations, (NCFR) founded in 1938, is the oldest multidisciplinary, nonpartisan professional organization focused solely on family research, practice and education. The premier professional association for the multidisciplinary understanding of families. The members’ interestsâ€"as diverse as their careers and backgroundsâ€"are focused on topics and efforts that yield a common benefit: …understanding and strengthening families. NCFR members are professionals dedicated to understanding and strengthening families. Our 3,400-plus members come from more than 35 countries and all 50 U.S. states, and include: researchers, demographers, marriage and family therapists, parent/family educators, university faculty, students, social workers, public health workers, extension specialists and faculty, ECFE teachers, clergy, counselors, K-12 teachers, and more.

Areas of practice

Home Economics is also called Human sciences based on everyday work where the setting is the house. Home economics has four dimensions of practice:

• as an academic discipline to educate new scholars, to conduct research and to discover new knowledge and ways of thinking for professionals and for society
• everyday living in households, families and communities for developing life skills and develop potential for growth
• curriculum area that facilitates students to discover and further develop their own resources and capabilities
• influence and develop policy to advocate for individuals, families and communities to achieve empowerment and well-being, utilize transformative practices, and facilitate sustainable futures.

To be successful in these four dimensions of practice means that the profession is constantly evolving, and there will always be new ways of performing the profession.

Learn more »

The Russian military intervention in Ukraine, which began in late February 2014, prompted a number of governments to apply sanctions against individuals, businesses and officials from Russia and Ukraine. Sanctions were approved by the United States, the European Union (EU) and other countries and international organisations. Russia has responded with sanctions against a number of countries, including a total ban on food imports from the EU, United States, Norway, Canada and Australia.

The sanctions contributed to the collapse of the Russian ruble and the Russian financial crisis (2014â€"present). They also caused economic damage to a number of EU countries, with the total losses estimated at €100 billion.

According to Ukrainian officials, the sanctions forced Russia to change its approach towards Ukraine and undermined the Russian military advances in the region. Representatives of these countries say that they will lift sanctions against Russia only after Moscow fulfils the Minsk II agreements.

Background

In response to the Crimean crisis and the subsequent annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, some governments and international organisations, led by the United States and European Union, imposed sanctions on Russian individuals and businesses. As the unrest expanded into other parts of southern and eastern Ukraine, and later escalated into the ongoing war in the Donbass region, the scope of the sanctions increased. The Russian government responded in kind, with sanctions against some Canadian and American individuals and, in August 2014, with a total ban on food imports from the European Union, United States, Norway, Canada and Australia.

Sanctions against Russian and Ukrainian individuals, companies and officials

First round of sanctions: March/April 2014

On 6 March 2014, the U.S. president Barack Obama, invoking, inter alia, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and the National Emergencies Act, signed an executive order that declared a national emergency and ordered sanctions, including travel bans and the freezing of their U.S. assets, against not-yet-specified individuals, later to be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury (in consultation with the Secretary of State) who had "asserted governmental authority in the Crimean region without the authorization of the Government of Ukraine" and whose actions were found, inter alia, to "undermine democratic processes and institutions in Ukraine".

The U.S., the EU and Canada introduced the first round of specifically targeted sanctions on 17 March 2014, the day after the Crimean referendum and a few hours before the Russian president Vladimir Putin, by signing a decree recognizing Crimea as an independent state, laid the groundwork for its annexation by Russia.

The principal EU sanction that day aimed to "prevent the entry into (…) their territories of the natural persons responsible for actions which undermine (…) the territorial integrity (…) of Ukraine, and of natural persons associated with them, as listed in the Annex". The EU imposed its sanctions "in the absence of de-escalatory steps by the Russian Federation" in order to bring an end to the violence in eastern Ukraine. The EU at the same time clarified that the Union "remains ready to reverse its decisions and reengage with Russia when it starts contributing actively and without ambiguities to finding a solution to the Ukrainian crisis". These 17 March sanctions were the most wide-ranging sanctions used against Russia since the 1991 fall of the Soviet Union. Japan also announced sanctions against Russia. These included the suspension of talks regarding military matters, space, investment, and visa requirements. A few days thereafter, the US government announced it was expa nding the sanctions.

On 19 March, Australia imposed sanctions against Russia after annexation of Crimea from Ukraine. The Australian government imposed targeted financial sanctions and travel bans on those who have been instrumental in the Russian threat to Ukraine's sovereignty. The Australian sanctions were expanded on 21 May.

In early April, Albania, Iceland and Montenegro, as well as Ukraine, decided to follow the EU and impose the same restrictions and travel bans issued by the EU on 17 March. Igor Lukšić, foreign minister of Montenegro, said that despite a "centuries old-tradition" of good ties with Russia, joining the EU in imposing sanctions had "always been the only reasonable choice". Slightly earlier in March, Moldova had decided to follow the EU and impose the same set of sanctions against former president of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych and a number of former Ukrainian officials, as announced by the EU on 5 March. In response to the sanctions introduced by the United States and the EU, the State Duma (Russian parliament) unanimously passed a resolution asking for all members of the Duma to be included on the sanctions list. The sanctions were expanded to include prominent Russian businessmen and women a few days later.

Second round of sanctions: April 2014

On 28 April, the United States imposed a ban on business transactions within its territory on seven Russian officials, including Igor Sechin, executive chairman of the Russian state oil company Rosneft, and seventeen Russian companies. On the same day, the European Union issued travel bans against a further fifteen individuals. In connection with this, the EU issued a paper stating the aims of the sanctions. The EU states that their "sanctions are not punitive, but designed to bring about a change in policy or activity by the target country, entities or individuals. Measures are therefore always targeted at such policies or activities, the means to conduct them and those responsible for them. At the same time, the EU makes every effort to minimise adverse consequences for the civilian population or for legitimate activities".

Third round of sanctions: 2014â€"present

In response to the escalating War in Donbass, on 17 July 2014 the United States extended its transactions ban to two major Russian energy firms, Rosneft and Novatek, and to two banks, Gazprombank and Vnesheconombank. United States also urged EU leaders to join the Third Wave leading EU to start drafting European Sanctions a day before. On 25 July, the EU officially expanded its sanctions to an additional fifteen individuals and eighteen entities, followed by an additional eight individuals and three entities on 30 July. On 31 July 2014 the EU introduced the third round of sanctions which included an embargo on arms and related material, and embargo on dual-use goods and technology intended for military use or a military end user, a ban on imports of arms and related material, controls on export of equipment for the oil industry, and a restriction on the issuance of and trade in certain bonds, equity or similar financial instruments on a maturity greater than 90 days (On September 2014 lowered to 30 days)

On 24 July 2014, Canada announced sanctions targeting Russian arms, energy and financial entities.

On 5 August 2014, Japan decided to freeze the assets of "individuals and groups supporting the separation of Crimea from Ukraine" and restrict imports from Crimea. Japan will additionally freeze funds for new projects in Russia in line with the policy of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

On 8 August 2014 Australian prime minister Tony Abbott announced that Australia is "working towards" tougher sanctions against Russia, which should be implemented in the coming weeks.

On 12 August 2014 Norway decided to adopt the tougher sanctions against Russia that were imposed by the EU and the United States on 12 August 2014. Although Norway is not a part of the EU, the Norwegian Foreign Minister Børge Brende said that it would impose restrictions similar to the EU's 1 August sanctions. Russian state-owned banks will be banned from taking long-term and mid-term loans, arms exports will be banned and supplies of equipment, technology and assistance to the Russian oil sector will be prohibited.

On 14 August 2014 Switzerland expanded sanctions against Russia over its threat to Ukraine's sovereignty. Swiss government added 26 more Russians and pro-Russian Ukrainians to the list of sanctioned Russian citizens that was first announced after Russia's annexation of Crimea. On 27 August 2014 Switzerland further expanded their sanctions against Russia. The Swiss government said it is expanding measures to prevent the circumvention of sanctions relating to the situation in Ukraine to include the third round of sanctions imposed by the EU in July. The Swiss government also stated that five Russian banks (Sberbank, VTB, Vnesheconombank, Gazprombank and Rosselkhoz) will require authorisation to issue long-term financial instruments in Switzerland.

On 14 August 2014 Ukraine passed a law introducing Ukrainian sanctions against Russia. The law includes 172 individuals and 65 entities in Russia and other countries for supporting and financing "terrorism" in Ukraine, though actual sanctions would need approval from Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council.

On 28 August 2014 Switzerland amended its sanctions to include the sanctions imposed by the EU in July.

On 11 September 2014, US President Barack Obama said that the United States would join the EU in imposing tougher sanctions on Russia's financial, energy and defence sectors. On 12 September 2014, the United States imposed sanctions on Russia's largest bank (Sberbank), a major arms maker and arctic (Rostec), deepwater and shale exploration by its biggest oil companies (Gazprom, Gazprom Neft, Lukoil, Surgutneftegas and Rosneft). Sberbank and Rostec will have limited ability to access the US debt markets. The sanction on the oil companies seek to ban co-operation with Russian oil firms on energy technology and services by companies including Exxon Mobil Corp. and BP Plc.

On 24 September 2014, Japan imposed additional sanctions against Russia by banning the issuance of securities by five Russian banks (Sberbank, VTB, Gazprombank, Rosselkhozbank and development bank VEB) and also tightened restrictions on defence exports to Russia.

On 3 October 2014, US Vice President Joe Biden said that "It was America's leadership and the president of the United States insisting, oft times almost having to embarrass Europe to stand up and take economic hits to impose costs" and added that "And the results have been massive capital flight from Russia, a virtual freeze on foreign direct investment, a ruble at an all-time low against the dollar, and the Russian economy teetering on the brink of recession. We don't want Russia to collapse. We want Russia to succeed. But Putin has to make a choice. These asymmetrical advances on another country cannot be tolerated. The international system will collapse if they are."

On 18 December 2014 the European Union banned some investments in Crimea, halting support for Russian Federation Black Sea oil and gas exploration and stopping European companies from purchasing real estate or companies in Crimea, or offering tourism services. On 19 December 2014, US President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Russian-occupied Crimea by executive order prohibiting exports of US goods and services to the region.

On 27 January 2015 the new government of Greece under Alexis Tsipras were preparing to veto further European sanctions on Russia, but agreed to extend the term of existing sanctions until further talks later in the year. Some member countries, including Italy, Cyprus, Bulgaria, Luxembourg and Austria, were split on further sanctions, but have nominated to go down the sanctions route. Notwithstanding, during the Foreign Affairs Council on 29 January 2015, a unanimous EU condemned "the indiscriminate shelling of residential areas, especially in Mariupol, and the escalation of fighting in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions." The foreign ministers of the EU added that "The Council expects Russia to exert its influence and to induce the separatists to fully live up to the commitments under the Minsk agreements. These include notably the cessation of hostilities and the withdrawal of heavy weapons from the security zone as urgent first steps." The EU agreed to extend existing restrictive m easures and called for a proposal within a week on additional targeted sanctions, for a decision at the Foreign Affairs Council on 9 February. On this date the Council adopted "additional listings concerning separatists in Eastern Ukraine and their supporters in Russia". These consist of an asset freeze and a travel ban on 19 persons and 9 entities involved in action against Ukraine's territorial integrity. To "give space for current diplomatic efforts", the Council put the entry into force of the measures on hold until Monday 16 February 2015, in relation to the Minsk summit taking place on 11 February.

On February 16, 2015, the EU increased its sanction list to cover 151 individuals and 37 entities. Australia indicated that it would follow the EU in a new round of sanctions. If the EU sanctioned new Russian and Ukrainian entities then Australia would keep their sanctions in line with the EU.

On February 18, 2015, Canada increased its sanctions list by 37 Russian citizens and 17 Russian entities. Rosneft and Anatoly Antonov, deputy minister of defense became sanctioned. In June 2015 Canada added three individuals and 14 entities, including Gazprom. Media suggested the sanctions were delayed because Gazprom was a main sponsor of the 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup then concluding in Canada.

In June 2015, the G7 collectively extended sanctions already in place for an additional six months. On 21 December 2015, the EU extended economic sanctions against Russia until 31 July 2016. France announced in January 2016 that it wants to lift the sanctions in this summer. Earlier, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry mentioned the possible lifting of sanctions.

In June 2016, the French Senate voted to urge its government to "gradually and partially" lift the EU sanctions on Russia, although the vote was non-binding.

In September 2016, the EU extended its sanctions, for another 6 months, against Russian officials and pro-Moscow separatists in Ukraine. An EU asset freeze on ex-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was upheld by the bloc's courts.

On March 13, 2017 the EU extended until September 2017 the asset freezes and travel bans for 150 people linked to the territorial dispute. The sanctions include former Ukrainian president, Viktor Yanukovych, and senior members of his administration.

Sanctions over Ukrainians held by Russia

In April 2016, Lithuania sanctioned 46 individuals who were involved in the detention and sentencing of Ukrainian citizens Nadiya Savchenko, Oleh Sentsov, and Olexandr Kolchenko. Lithuanian Foreign Minister Linas Linkevičius said that his country wanted to "focus attention on the unacceptable and cynical violations of international law and human rights in Russia. [...] It would be more effective if the blacklist became Europe-wide. We hope to start such a discussion."

Sanctions against Crimea

The United States, Canada, the European Union and other European countries (including Ukraine) imposed economic sanctions specifically targeting Crimea. Sanctions prohibit the sale, supply, transfer, or export of goods and technology in several sectors, including services directly related to tourism and infrastructure. They list seven ports where cruise ships cannot dock. Sanctions against Crimean individuals include travel bans and asset freezes. Visa and MasterCard have stopped service in Crimea between December 2014 and April 2015.

Consequences and assessment

The sanctions introduced both by and against Russia slowed down the trade between Russia and EU, causing damage to both Russian and European economy.

Effect on Russia

The economic sanctions are generally believed to have helped weaken the Russian economy and to intensify the challenges that Russia was already facing.

A 2015 data analysis confirmed Russia’s entry into a recession, with negative GDP of -2.2% for the first quarter of 2015, as compared to the first quarter of 2014. Further, the combined effect of the sanctions and the rapid decline in oil prices in 2014 has caused significant downward pressure on the value of the ruble and flight of capital out of Russia. At the same time, the sanctions on access to financing have forced Russia to use part of its foreign exchange reserves to prop up the economy. These events forced the Central Bank of Russia to stop supporting the value of the ruble and increase interest rates.

Russia’s ban on western imports had the additional effect on these challenging events as the embargo led to higher food prices and further inflation in addition to the effects of decreased value of the ruble which had already raised the price of imported goods.

Effect on US and EU countries

The losses of EU have been estimated as €100 billion, with Italy in particular losing over €1.25 billion. The German business sector, with around 30,000 workplaces depending on trade with Russia, also reported being affected by the sanctions. The sanctions had an impact on numerous European market sectors, including energy, agriculture, and aviation. In March 2016, the Finnish farmers’ union MTK stated that the Russian sanctions and falling prices have put farmers under tremendous pressure. Finland’s Natural Resources Institute LUKE has estimated that last year farmers saw their incomes shrink by 40 percent compared to the previous year.

In February 2015, Exxon Mobil reported losing about $1 billion due to sanctions.

Opposition within Europe

Italy, Hungary, Greece, France, some German states, Cyprus and Slovakia are among the EU states most skeptical about the sanctions and have called for review of sanctions. The Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán stated that Europe “shot itself in the foot” by introducing economic sanctions. In the words of former Bulgarian Prime Minister Boiko Borisov: “I don’t know how Russia is affected by the sanctions, but Bulgaria is affected severely”; Czech President Miloš Zeman and Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico also argued that the sanctions should be lifted.

The Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras said that Greece would seek to mend ties between Russia and EU through European institutions. Tsipras also said that Greece was not in favour of Western sanctions imposed on Russia, adding that it risked the start of another Cold War.

A number of business figures in France and Germany have opposed the sanctions. The German Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel suggested that the Ukrainian crisis should be resolved by dialogue rather than economic confrontation, later adding that the reinforcement of anti-Russian sanctions will “provoke an even more dangerous situation… in Europe”.

Paolo Gentiloni, Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs, said that the sanctions “are not the solution to the conflict”. Some companies, most notably Siemens Gas Turbine Technologies LLC, were reported to attempt bypassing the sanctions and exporting power generation turbines to the annexed Crimea.

In August 2015, the British think tank Bow Group released a report on sanctions, calling for the removal of them. According to the report, the sanctions have had "adverse consequences for European and American businesses, and if they are prolonged... they can have even more deleterious effects in the future"; the potential cost of sanctions for the Western countries has been estimated as over $700 billion.

Sanctions by Russia

Three days after the first sanctions against Russia, on 20 March 2014, the Russian Foreign Ministry published a list of reciprocal sanctions against certain American citizens, which consisted of ten names, including Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner, Senator John McCain, and two advisers to Barack Obama. The ministry said in the statement, "Treating our country in such way, as Washington could have already ascertained, is inappropriate and counterproductive", and reiterated that sanctions against Russia would have a boomerang effect. On 24 March, Russia banned thirteen Canadian officials, including members of the Parliament of Canada, from entering the country.

On 6 August 2014, Putin signed a decree "On the use of specific economic measures", which mandated an effective embargo for a one-year period on imports of most of the agricultural products whose country of origin had either "adopted the decision on introduction of economic sanctions in respect of Russian legal and (or) physical entities, or joined same". The next day, the Russian government ordinance was adopted and published with immediate effect, which specified the banned items as well as the countries of provenance: the United States, the EU, Norway, Canada and Australia, including a ban on fruit, vegetables, meat, fish, milk and dairy imports. Prior to the embargo, food exports from the EU to Russia were worth around €11.8 billion, or 10% of the total EU exports to Russia. Food exports from the United States to Russia were worth around €972 million. Food exports from Canada were worth around €385 million.

Russia had previously taken a position that it would not engage in "tit-for-tat" sanctions, but, announcing the embargo, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said, "There is nothing good in sanctions and it was not an easy decision to take, but we had to do it." He indicated that sanctions relating to the transport manufacturing sector were also being considered. United States Treasury spokesperson David Cohen said that sanctions affecting access to food were "not something that the US and its allies would ever do".

On the same day, Russia announced a ban on the use of its airspace by Ukrainian aircraft.

In January 2015, it became clear that Russian authorities would not allow a Member of the European Parliament, Lithuanian MEP Gabrielius Landsbergis, make a visit to Moscow due to political reasons.

In March 2015, Latvian MEP Sandra Kalniete and Speaker of the Polish Senate Bogdan Borusewicz were both denied entry into Russia under the existing sanctions regime, and were thus unable to attend the funeral of murdered opposition politician Boris Nemtsov.

After a member of the German Bundestag was denied entry into Russia in May 2015, Russia released a blacklist to European Union governments of 89 politicians and officials from the EU who are not allowed entry into Russia under the present sanctions regime. Russia asked for the blacklist to not be made public. The list is said to include eight Swedes, as well as two MPs and two MEPs from the Netherlands. Finland's national broadcaster Yle published a leaked German version of the list.

In response to this publication, British politician Malcolm Rifkind (whose name was included on the Russian list) commented: "It shows we are making an impact because they wouldn’t have reacted unless they felt very sore at what had happened. Once sanctions were extended, they've had a major impact on the Russian economy. This has happened at a time when the oil price has collapsed and therefore a main source of revenue for Mr Putin has disappeared. That’s pretty important when it comes to his attempts to build up his military might and to force his neighbours to do what they’re told." He added, “If there had to be such a ban, I am rather proud to be on it â€" I’d be rather miffed if I wasn’t.” Another person on the list, Swedish MEP Gunnar Hökmark, remarked that he was proud to be on the list and said "a regime that does this does it because it is afraid, and at heart it is weak".

With regard to Russia′s entry ban on European politicians, a spokesperson from the EU said, "The list with 89 names has now been shared by the Russian authorities. We don't have any other information on legal basis, criteria and process of this decision. We consider this measure as totally arbitrary and unjustified, especially in the absence of any further clarification and transparency."

On 29 June 2016, Russian president Vladimir Putin signed a decree that extended the embargo on the countries already sanctioned until 31 December 2017.

List of sanctioned individuals

Sanctioned individuals include notable and high-level central government personnel on all sides. In addition, companies suggested for possible involvement in the controversial issues have also been sanctioned.

Learn more »

The Russian military intervention in Ukraine, which began in late February 2014, prompted a number of governments to apply sanctions against individuals, businesses and officials from Russia and Ukraine. Sanctions were approved by the United States, the European Union (EU) and other countries and international organisations. Russia has responded with sanctions against a number of countries, including a total ban on food imports from the EU, United States, Norway, Canada and Australia.

The sanctions contributed to the collapse of the Russian ruble and the Russian financial crisis (2014â€"present). They also caused economic damage to a number of EU countries, with the total losses estimated at €100 billion.

According to Ukrainian officials, the sanctions forced Russia to change its approach towards Ukraine and undermined the Russian military advances in the region. Representatives of these countries say that they will lift sanctions against Russia only after Moscow fulfils the Minsk II agreements.

Background

In response to the Crimean crisis and the subsequent annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, some governments and international organisations, led by the United States and European Union, imposed sanctions on Russian individuals and businesses. As the unrest expanded into other parts of southern and eastern Ukraine, and later escalated into the ongoing war in the Donbass region, the scope of the sanctions increased. The Russian government responded in kind, with sanctions against some Canadian and American individuals and, in August 2014, with a total ban on food imports from the European Union, United States, Norway, Canada and Australia.

Sanctions against Russian and Ukrainian individuals, companies and officials

First round of sanctions: March/April 2014

On 6 March 2014, the U.S. president Barack Obama, invoking, inter alia, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and the National Emergencies Act, signed an executive order that declared a national emergency and ordered sanctions, including travel bans and the freezing of their U.S. assets, against not-yet-specified individuals, later to be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury (in consultation with the Secretary of State) who had "asserted governmental authority in the Crimean region without the authorization of the Government of Ukraine" and whose actions were found, inter alia, to "undermine democratic processes and institutions in Ukraine".

The U.S., the EU and Canada introduced the first round of specifically targeted sanctions on 17 March 2014, the day after the Crimean referendum and a few hours before the Russian president Vladimir Putin, by signing a decree recognizing Crimea as an independent state, laid the groundwork for its annexation by Russia.

The principal EU sanction that day aimed to "prevent the entry into (…) their territories of the natural persons responsible for actions which undermine (…) the territorial integrity (…) of Ukraine, and of natural persons associated with them, as listed in the Annex". The EU imposed its sanctions "in the absence of de-escalatory steps by the Russian Federation" in order to bring an end to the violence in eastern Ukraine. The EU at the same time clarified that the Union "remains ready to reverse its decisions and reengage with Russia when it starts contributing actively and without ambiguities to finding a solution to the Ukrainian crisis". These 17 March sanctions were the most wide-ranging sanctions used against Russia since the 1991 fall of the Soviet Union. Japan also announced sanctions against Russia. These included the suspension of talks regarding military matters, space, investment, and visa requirements. A few days thereafter, the US government announced it was expa nding the sanctions.

On 19 March, Australia imposed sanctions against Russia after annexation of Crimea from Ukraine. The Australian government imposed targeted financial sanctions and travel bans on those who have been instrumental in the Russian threat to Ukraine's sovereignty. The Australian sanctions were expanded on 21 May.

In early April, Albania, Iceland and Montenegro, as well as Ukraine, decided to follow the EU and impose the same restrictions and travel bans issued by the EU on 17 March. Igor Lukšić, foreign minister of Montenegro, said that despite a "centuries old-tradition" of good ties with Russia, joining the EU in imposing sanctions had "always been the only reasonable choice". Slightly earlier in March, Moldova had decided to follow the EU and impose the same set of sanctions against former president of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych and a number of former Ukrainian officials, as announced by the EU on 5 March. In response to the sanctions introduced by the United States and the EU, the State Duma (Russian parliament) unanimously passed a resolution asking for all members of the Duma to be included on the sanctions list. The sanctions were expanded to include prominent Russian businessmen and women a few days later.

Second round of sanctions: April 2014

On 28 April, the United States imposed a ban on business transactions within its territory on seven Russian officials, including Igor Sechin, executive chairman of the Russian state oil company Rosneft, and seventeen Russian companies. On the same day, the European Union issued travel bans against a further fifteen individuals. In connection with this, the EU issued a paper stating the aims of the sanctions. The EU states that their "sanctions are not punitive, but designed to bring about a change in policy or activity by the target country, entities or individuals. Measures are therefore always targeted at such policies or activities, the means to conduct them and those responsible for them. At the same time, the EU makes every effort to minimise adverse consequences for the civilian population or for legitimate activities".

Third round of sanctions: 2014â€"present

In response to the escalating War in Donbass, on 17 July 2014 the United States extended its transactions ban to two major Russian energy firms, Rosneft and Novatek, and to two banks, Gazprombank and Vnesheconombank. United States also urged EU leaders to join the Third Wave leading EU to start drafting European Sanctions a day before. On 25 July, the EU officially expanded its sanctions to an additional fifteen individuals and eighteen entities, followed by an additional eight individuals and three entities on 30 July. On 31 July 2014 the EU introduced the third round of sanctions which included an embargo on arms and related material, and embargo on dual-use goods and technology intended for military use or a military end user, a ban on imports of arms and related material, controls on export of equipment for the oil industry, and a restriction on the issuance of and trade in certain bonds, equity or similar financial instruments on a maturity greater than 90 days (On September 2014 lowered to 30 days)

On 24 July 2014, Canada announced sanctions targeting Russian arms, energy and financial entities.

On 5 August 2014, Japan decided to freeze the assets of "individuals and groups supporting the separation of Crimea from Ukraine" and restrict imports from Crimea. Japan will additionally freeze funds for new projects in Russia in line with the policy of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

On 8 August 2014 Australian prime minister Tony Abbott announced that Australia is "working towards" tougher sanctions against Russia, which should be implemented in the coming weeks.

On 12 August 2014 Norway decided to adopt the tougher sanctions against Russia that were imposed by the EU and the United States on 12 August 2014. Although Norway is not a part of the EU, the Norwegian Foreign Minister Børge Brende said that it would impose restrictions similar to the EU's 1 August sanctions. Russian state-owned banks will be banned from taking long-term and mid-term loans, arms exports will be banned and supplies of equipment, technology and assistance to the Russian oil sector will be prohibited.

On 14 August 2014 Switzerland expanded sanctions against Russia over its threat to Ukraine's sovereignty. Swiss government added 26 more Russians and pro-Russian Ukrainians to the list of sanctioned Russian citizens that was first announced after Russia's annexation of Crimea. On 27 August 2014 Switzerland further expanded their sanctions against Russia. The Swiss government said it is expanding measures to prevent the circumvention of sanctions relating to the situation in Ukraine to include the third round of sanctions imposed by the EU in July. The Swiss government also stated that five Russian banks (Sberbank, VTB, Vnesheconombank, Gazprombank and Rosselkhoz) will require authorisation to issue long-term financial instruments in Switzerland.

On 14 August 2014 Ukraine passed a law introducing Ukrainian sanctions against Russia. The law includes 172 individuals and 65 entities in Russia and other countries for supporting and financing "terrorism" in Ukraine, though actual sanctions would need approval from Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council.

On 28 August 2014 Switzerland amended its sanctions to include the sanctions imposed by the EU in July.

On 11 September 2014, US President Barack Obama said that the United States would join the EU in imposing tougher sanctions on Russia's financial, energy and defence sectors. On 12 September 2014, the United States imposed sanctions on Russia's largest bank (Sberbank), a major arms maker and arctic (Rostec), deepwater and shale exploration by its biggest oil companies (Gazprom, Gazprom Neft, Lukoil, Surgutneftegas and Rosneft). Sberbank and Rostec will have limited ability to access the US debt markets. The sanction on the oil companies seek to ban co-operation with Russian oil firms on energy technology and services by companies including Exxon Mobil Corp. and BP Plc.

On 24 September 2014, Japan imposed additional sanctions against Russia by banning the issuance of securities by five Russian banks (Sberbank, VTB, Gazprombank, Rosselkhozbank and development bank VEB) and also tightened restrictions on defence exports to Russia.

On 3 October 2014, US Vice President Joe Biden said that "It was America's leadership and the president of the United States insisting, oft times almost having to embarrass Europe to stand up and take economic hits to impose costs" and added that "And the results have been massive capital flight from Russia, a virtual freeze on foreign direct investment, a ruble at an all-time low against the dollar, and the Russian economy teetering on the brink of recession. We don't want Russia to collapse. We want Russia to succeed. But Putin has to make a choice. These asymmetrical advances on another country cannot be tolerated. The international system will collapse if they are."

On 18 December 2014 the European Union banned some investments in Crimea, halting support for Russian Federation Black Sea oil and gas exploration and stopping European companies from purchasing real estate or companies in Crimea, or offering tourism services. On 19 December 2014, US President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Russian-occupied Crimea by executive order prohibiting exports of US goods and services to the region.

On 27 January 2015 the new government of Greece under Alexis Tsipras were preparing to veto further European sanctions on Russia, but agreed to extend the term of existing sanctions until further talks later in the year. Some member countries, including Italy, Cyprus, Bulgaria, Luxembourg and Austria, were split on further sanctions, but have nominated to go down the sanctions route. Notwithstanding, during the Foreign Affairs Council on 29 January 2015, a unanimous EU condemned "the indiscriminate shelling of residential areas, especially in Mariupol, and the escalation of fighting in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions." The foreign ministers of the EU added that "The Council expects Russia to exert its influence and to induce the separatists to fully live up to the commitments under the Minsk agreements. These include notably the cessation of hostilities and the withdrawal of heavy weapons from the security zone as urgent first steps." The EU agreed to extend existing restrictive m easures and called for a proposal within a week on additional targeted sanctions, for a decision at the Foreign Affairs Council on 9 February. On this date the Council adopted "additional listings concerning separatists in Eastern Ukraine and their supporters in Russia". These consist of an asset freeze and a travel ban on 19 persons and 9 entities involved in action against Ukraine's territorial integrity. To "give space for current diplomatic efforts", the Council put the entry into force of the measures on hold until Monday 16 February 2015, in relation to the Minsk summit taking place on 11 February.

On February 16, 2015, the EU increased its sanction list to cover 151 individuals and 37 entities. Australia indicated that it would follow the EU in a new round of sanctions. If the EU sanctioned new Russian and Ukrainian entities then Australia would keep their sanctions in line with the EU.

On February 18, 2015, Canada increased its sanctions list by 37 Russian citizens and 17 Russian entities. Rosneft and Anatoly Antonov, deputy minister of defense became sanctioned. In June 2015 Canada added three individuals and 14 entities, including Gazprom. Media suggested the sanctions were delayed because Gazprom was a main sponsor of the 2015 FIFA Women's World Cup then concluding in Canada.

In June 2015, the G7 collectively extended sanctions already in place for an additional six months. On 21 December 2015, the EU extended economic sanctions against Russia until 31 July 2016. France announced in January 2016 that it wants to lift the sanctions in this summer. Earlier, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry mentioned the possible lifting of sanctions.

In June 2016, the French Senate voted to urge its government to "gradually and partially" lift the EU sanctions on Russia, although the vote was non-binding.

In September 2016, the EU extended its sanctions, for another 6 months, against Russian officials and pro-Moscow separatists in Ukraine. An EU asset freeze on ex-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych was upheld by the bloc's courts.

On March 13, 2017 the EU extended until September 2017 the asset freezes and travel bans for 150 people linked to the territorial dispute. The sanctions include former Ukrainian president, Viktor Yanukovych, and senior members of his administration.

Sanctions over Ukrainians held by Russia

In April 2016, Lithuania sanctioned 46 individuals who were involved in the detention and sentencing of Ukrainian citizens Nadiya Savchenko, Oleh Sentsov, and Olexandr Kolchenko. Lithuanian Foreign Minister Linas Linkevičius said that his country wanted to "focus attention on the unacceptable and cynical violations of international law and human rights in Russia. [...] It would be more effective if the blacklist became Europe-wide. We hope to start such a discussion."

Sanctions against Crimea

The United States, Canada, the European Union and other European countries (including Ukraine) imposed economic sanctions specifically targeting Crimea. Sanctions prohibit the sale, supply, transfer, or export of goods and technology in several sectors, including services directly related to tourism and infrastructure. They list seven ports where cruise ships cannot dock. Sanctions against Crimean individuals include travel bans and asset freezes. Visa and MasterCard have stopped service in Crimea between December 2014 and April 2015.

Consequences and assessment

The sanctions introduced both by and against Russia slowed down the trade between Russia and EU, causing damage to both Russian and European economy.

Effect on Russia

The economic sanctions are generally believed to have helped weaken the Russian economy and to intensify the challenges that Russia was already facing.

A 2015 data analysis confirmed Russia’s entry into a recession, with negative GDP of -2.2% for the first quarter of 2015, as compared to the first quarter of 2014. Further, the combined effect of the sanctions and the rapid decline in oil prices in 2014 has caused significant downward pressure on the value of the ruble and flight of capital out of Russia. At the same time, the sanctions on access to financing have forced Russia to use part of its foreign exchange reserves to prop up the economy. These events forced the Central Bank of Russia to stop supporting the value of the ruble and increase interest rates.

Russia’s ban on western imports had the additional effect on these challenging events as the embargo led to higher food prices and further inflation in addition to the effects of decreased value of the ruble which had already raised the price of imported goods.

Effect on US and EU countries

The losses of EU have been estimated as €100 billion, with Italy in particular losing over €1.25 billion. The German business sector, with around 30,000 workplaces depending on trade with Russia, also reported being affected by the sanctions. The sanctions had an impact on numerous European market sectors, including energy, agriculture, and aviation. In March 2016, the Finnish farmers’ union MTK stated that the Russian sanctions and falling prices have put farmers under tremendous pressure. Finland’s Natural Resources Institute LUKE has estimated that last year farmers saw their incomes shrink by 40 percent compared to the previous year.

In February 2015, Exxon Mobil reported losing about $1 billion due to sanctions.

Opposition within Europe

Italy, Hungary, Greece, France, some German states, Cyprus and Slovakia are among the EU states most skeptical about the sanctions and have called for review of sanctions. The Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán stated that Europe “shot itself in the foot” by introducing economic sanctions. In the words of former Bulgarian Prime Minister Boiko Borisov: “I don’t know how Russia is affected by the sanctions, but Bulgaria is affected severely”; Czech President Miloš Zeman and Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico also argued that the sanctions should be lifted.

The Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras said that Greece would seek to mend ties between Russia and EU through European institutions. Tsipras also said that Greece was not in favour of Western sanctions imposed on Russia, adding that it risked the start of another Cold War.

A number of business figures in France and Germany have opposed the sanctions. The German Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel suggested that the Ukrainian crisis should be resolved by dialogue rather than economic confrontation, later adding that the reinforcement of anti-Russian sanctions will “provoke an even more dangerous situation… in Europe”.

Paolo Gentiloni, Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs, said that the sanctions “are not the solution to the conflict”. Some companies, most notably Siemens Gas Turbine Technologies LLC, were reported to attempt bypassing the sanctions and exporting power generation turbines to the annexed Crimea.

In August 2015, the British think tank Bow Group released a report on sanctions, calling for the removal of them. According to the report, the sanctions have had "adverse consequences for European and American businesses, and if they are prolonged... they can have even more deleterious effects in the future"; the potential cost of sanctions for the Western countries has been estimated as over $700 billion.

Sanctions by Russia

Three days after the first sanctions against Russia, on 20 March 2014, the Russian Foreign Ministry published a list of reciprocal sanctions against certain American citizens, which consisted of ten names, including Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner, Senator John McCain, and two advisers to Barack Obama. The ministry said in the statement, "Treating our country in such way, as Washington could have already ascertained, is inappropriate and counterproductive", and reiterated that sanctions against Russia would have a boomerang effect. On 24 March, Russia banned thirteen Canadian officials, including members of the Parliament of Canada, from entering the country.

On 6 August 2014, Putin signed a decree "On the use of specific economic measures", which mandated an effective embargo for a one-year period on imports of most of the agricultural products whose country of origin had either "adopted the decision on introduction of economic sanctions in respect of Russian legal and (or) physical entities, or joined same". The next day, the Russian government ordinance was adopted and published with immediate effect, which specified the banned items as well as the countries of provenance: the United States, the EU, Norway, Canada and Australia, including a ban on fruit, vegetables, meat, fish, milk and dairy imports. Prior to the embargo, food exports from the EU to Russia were worth around €11.8 billion, or 10% of the total EU exports to Russia. Food exports from the United States to Russia were worth around €972 million. Food exports from Canada were worth around €385 million.

Russia had previously taken a position that it would not engage in "tit-for-tat" sanctions, but, announcing the embargo, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said, "There is nothing good in sanctions and it was not an easy decision to take, but we had to do it." He indicated that sanctions relating to the transport manufacturing sector were also being considered. United States Treasury spokesperson David Cohen said that sanctions affecting access to food were "not something that the US and its allies would ever do".

On the same day, Russia announced a ban on the use of its airspace by Ukrainian aircraft.

In January 2015, it became clear that Russian authorities would not allow a Member of the European Parliament, Lithuanian MEP Gabrielius Landsbergis, make a visit to Moscow due to political reasons.

In March 2015, Latvian MEP Sandra Kalniete and Speaker of the Polish Senate Bogdan Borusewicz were both denied entry into Russia under the existing sanctions regime, and were thus unable to attend the funeral of murdered opposition politician Boris Nemtsov.

After a member of the German Bundestag was denied entry into Russia in May 2015, Russia released a blacklist to European Union governments of 89 politicians and officials from the EU who are not allowed entry into Russia under the present sanctions regime. Russia asked for the blacklist to not be made public. The list is said to include eight Swedes, as well as two MPs and two MEPs from the Netherlands. Finland's national broadcaster Yle published a leaked German version of the list.

In response to this publication, British politician Malcolm Rifkind (whose name was included on the Russian list) commented: "It shows we are making an impact because they wouldn’t have reacted unless they felt very sore at what had happened. Once sanctions were extended, they've had a major impact on the Russian economy. This has happened at a time when the oil price has collapsed and therefore a main source of revenue for Mr Putin has disappeared. That’s pretty important when it comes to his attempts to build up his military might and to force his neighbours to do what they’re told." He added, “If there had to be such a ban, I am rather proud to be on it â€" I’d be rather miffed if I wasn’t.” Another person on the list, Swedish MEP Gunnar Hökmark, remarked that he was proud to be on the list and said "a regime that does this does it because it is afraid, and at heart it is weak".

With regard to Russia′s entry ban on European politicians, a spokesperson from the EU said, "The list with 89 names has now been shared by the Russian authorities. We don't have any other information on legal basis, criteria and process of this decision. We consider this measure as totally arbitrary and unjustified, especially in the absence of any further clarification and transparency."

On 29 June 2016, Russian president Vladimir Putin signed a decree that extended the embargo on the countries already sanctioned until 31 December 2017.

List of sanctioned individuals

Sanctioned individuals include notable and high-level central government personnel on all sides. In addition, companies suggested for possible involvement in the controversial issues have also been sanctioned.

Learn more »

A great number of words of French origin have entered the English language to the extent that many Latin words have come to the English language. According to different sources, 45% of all English words have a French origin. This fact suggests that 80,000 words should appear in this list; this list, however, only includes words imported directly from French, such as both joy and joyous, and does not include derivatives formed in English of words borrowed from French, including joyful, joyfulness, partisanship, and parenthood. It also excludes both combinations of words of French origin with words whose origin is a language other than Fre nch â€" e. g.: ice cream, sunray, jellyfish, killjoy, lifeguard, and passageway â€" and English-made combinations of words of French origin â€" i. e.: grapefruit (grape + fruit,) layperson (lay + person,) mailorder, magpie, marketplace, surrender, petticoat, and straitjacket. This list also excludes words that come from French but were introduced into the English language via a language other than French, which include commodore, domineer, filibuster, ketone, loggia, lotto, mariachi, monsignor, oboe, paella, panzer, picayune, ranch, vendue, and veneer.

Although French is mainly from Latin (which accounts for about 60% of English vocabulary either directly or via a Romance language), it also includes words from Gaulish and Germanic languages (especially Old Frankish). Since English is of Germanic origin, words that have entered English from the Germanic elements in French might not strike the eye as distinctively from French. Conversely, as Latin gave many derivatives to both the English and the French languages, ascertaining that a given Latinate derivative did not come to the English language via French can be difficult in a few cases.

Historical context

Most of the French vocabulary now appearing in English was imported over the centuries following the Norman Conquest of 1066, when England came under the administration of Norman-speaking peoples. William the Conqueror invaded the island of Britain, distributing lands and property to the Normans. As a result, French became the language of culture and the administration. The majority of the population of England continued to use their Anglo-Saxon language, but it was influenced by the language of the ruling elite, resulting in doublets. Consider for example the words for the meats eaten by the Anglo-Norman nobility and the corresponding animals raised by the Anglo-Saxon peasants: beef / ox, mutton / sheep, veal / calf, pork / pig, or pairs of words pertaining to different registers of language: commence / start, continue / go on, disengage / withdraw, encounter / meet, vend / sell, purchase / buy. Words of French origin often refer to more abstract or elaborate notions than their A nglo-Saxon equivalents (e.g. liberty / freedom, justice / fairness), and are therefore of less frequent use in everyday language. This may not, however, be the case for all English words of French origin. Consider, for example: able, car, chair, city, country, fine, fruit, journey, juice, just, part, people, real, stay, table, travel, use, very, and wait.

After the rise of Henry Plantagenet to the throne of England, other forms of dialectal French may have gained in influence to the detriment of Norman French (notably the variants of Anjou where the House of Plantagenet came from, and possibly Poitevin, the tongue of Eleanor of Aquitaine). With the English claim to the throne of France, the influence of the language in use at the royal court of France in Paris increased. The cultural influence of France remained strong in the following centuries and from the Renaissance onward borrowings were mainly made from Parisian French, which became the de facto standard language of France.

Notable fields of French influence

Norman rule of England had a lasting impact on British society. Words from Anglo-Norman or Old French include terms related to:

Feudalism

Chivalry (homage, liege, peasant, government, seigniorage, suzerain, vassal, villain) and other institutions (bailiff, chancellor, council, government, mayor, minister, parliament), the organisation of religion (abbey, clergy, cloister, diocese, friar, mass, parish, prayer, preach, priest, sacristy, vestment, vestry, vicar), the nobility (baron, count, dame, duke, marquis, prince, sir), and the art of war (armour, baldric, dungeon, hauberk, mail, portcullis, rampart, surcoat). Many of these words related to the feudal system or medieval warfare have a Germanic origin (mainly through Old Frankish) (see also French words of Germanic origin).

The Norman origin of the British monarchy is still visible in expressions like Prince Regent, heir apparent, Princess Royal where the adjective is placed after the noun, like in French.

Heraldry

The vocabulary of heraldry has been heavily influenced by French (blazon, or, argent, sable, gules, passant), for more details see tinctures, attitudes, and charges of heraldry.

Sometimes used in heraldry, some mythological beasts (cockatrice, dragon, griffin, hippogriff, phoenix) or exotic animals (lion, leopard, antelope, gazelle, giraffe, camel, zebu, elephant, baboon, dolphin, ocelot, ostrich, chameleon) draw their name from French. It is also the case of some animals native of Europe (via Anglo-Norman: eagle, buzzard, falcon, squirrel, coney, rabbit, leveret, lizard, marten, ferret, salmon, viper).

Military

The vocabulary of warfare and the military include many words of French origin (battalion, dragoon, soldier, marine, grenadier, guard, officer, infantry, cavalry, army, artillery, corvette, musketeer, carabineer, pistol, fusilier, squad, squadron, platoon, brigade, corps, sortie, reconnaissance/reconnoitre, surrender, surveillance, rendezvous, espionage, volley, siege, terrain, troop, camouflage, logistics, matériel, accoutrements, bivouac, aide-de-camp, legionnaire, morale, esprit de corps, cordon sanitaire. See also military ranks: corporal, sergeant, lieutenant, captain, colonel, general, admiral. Many fencing terms are also from French.

Politics and economics

The political/economic lexicon include many words of French origin like money, treasury, exchequer, commerce, finance, tax, liberalism, capitalism, materialism, nationalism, plebiscite, coup d'état, regime, sovereignty, state, administration, federal, bureaucracy, constitution, jurisdiction, district.

Law

The judicial lexicon has also been heavily influenced by French (justice, judge, jury, attorney, court, case). (See also Law French).

Diplomacy

attaché, chargé d'affaires, envoy, embassy, chancery, diplomacy, démarche, communiqué, aide-mémoire, détente, entente, rapprochement, accord, treaty, alliance, passport, protocol.

Arts

art, music, dance, theatre, author, stage, paint, canvas, perform, harmony, melody, rhythm, trumpet, note, director, gallery, portrait, brush, pallet, montage, surrealism, impressionism, fauvism, cubism, symbolism, art nouveau, gouache, aquarelle, collage, render, frieze, grisaille …;

Architecture

aisle, arcade, arch, vault, voussoir, belfry, arc-boutant, buttress, bay, lintel, estrade, facade, balustrade, terrace, lunette, niche, pavilion, pilaster, porte cochère ;

Aviation and automobile engineering

France played a pioneering role in the fields of aviation (nacelle, empennage, fuselage, aileron, altimeter, canard, decalage, monocoque, turbine) and automobile engineering or design (chassis, piston, arbor, grille, tonneau, berline, sedan, limousine, cabriolet, coupé, convertible) ;

Cuisine

Veal, beef, pork, mutton, petit four, soufflé, mille-feuille, croissant, pastry, gateau, baba au rhum, cream, caramel, custard, fondant, fondue, marmalade, meringue, clafoutis, flognarde, beef bourguignon, cassoulet, casserole, confit, gratin, mustard, mayonnaise, sauce, pâté, foie gras, terrine, navarin …

Colours

Other influences include colour names (ecru, mauve, beige, carmine, maroon, blue, orange, violet, vermilion, turquoise, lilac, perse, scarlet, cerise) ; vegetables or fruits (courgette, aubergine, cabbage, carrot, cherry, chestnut, cucumber, nutmeg, quince, spinach, lemon, orange, apricot); months of the year (January, March, May, July, November, December).

Terms coined by French people

Some of the French words that made their way into the English language were coined by French inventors, discoverers or pioneers, or scientists: cinema, television, helicopter, parachute, harmonium, bathyscaphe, lactose, lecithin, bacteriophage, chlorophyll, mastodon, pterodactyl, oxygen, hydrogen, carbon, photography, stethoscope, thermometer, stratosphere, troposphere.

Named after French people

Some French words were named after French people (from their family name), especially in the fields of science (ampere, appertisation, baud, becquerel, coulomb, curie, daguerreotype, pascal, pasteurise, vernier), botany and mineralogy (begonia, bougainvillea, clementine, magnolia, dolomite, nicotine), fashion and style or any other cultural aspect (lavalier, leotard, recamier, mansard, chauvinism, kir, praline, saxophone, silhouette).

Proper names

The names of certain cities in non-francophone regions/countries entered English with French spelling (Ypres, Bruges, Louvain, Turin, Milan, Venice, Plaisance, Florence, Rome, Naples, Syracuse, Vienna, Prague, Munich, Cologne, Aix-la-Chapelle, Seville, Constantinople.

In North America, the names of some of the Native American peoples or First Nations the French came in contact with first are from French (Sioux, Saulteaux, Iroquois, Nez Perce, Huron, Cheyenne, Algonquin). It is also the case of some place names such as Arkansas, Michigan, Illinois, Maine, Vermont, Des Moines, Detroit, Chicago and Baton Rouge.

Main patterns of influence

Some words from Old French have been imported again from Middle French or Modern French, but have generally taken a more restrictive or specialised meaning the second time. Consider for instance : chief / chef, luminary / luminaire, liquor / liqueur, castle / château, hostel / hotel, mask / masque, necessary / nécessaire, petty / petit, ticket / etiquette, troop / troupe, vanguard / avant-garde. Note that the word in French has kept the general meaning: e.g. château in French means castle and chef means chief. Even when not imported several times in different forms, loanwords from French generally have a more restrictive or specialised meaning than in French: e.g. legume (in Fr. légume means vegetable), gateau (in Fr. gâteau means cake).

In some cases, the English language has been more conservative than the French one with Old French words, at least in spelling if not in pronunciation: e.g. apostle (O.Fr. apostle / M.Fr. apôtre), castle (O.Fr. castel or chastel / M.Fr. château), forest (O.Fr. forest / M.Fr. forêt), vessel (O.Fr. vaissel / M.Fr. vaisseau). Other Old French words have even disappeared from Modern French: dandelion.

On the other hand, a move to restore the classical roots (Latin or Ancient Greek) occurred in the 16th and 17th centuries. Thus words from Old French saw their spelling re-Latinized. Although in most cases this did not affect their pronunciation (e.g. debt, doubt, indict, mayor), in some cases it did (e.g. abnormal, adventure, benefit). The ph transcription of words of Greek etymology was restored instead of the f. Thus fantosme became phantom, fesan became pheasant. This move occurred also in French, although less systematically (Old French farmacie became pharmacie ("pharmacy"), fenix became phénix ("phoenix"), but fantosme became fantôme ("phantom, ghost") and fesan became faisan ("pheasant").

Beside re-Latinization that blurred the French origin of some words (e.g. peradventure), other modifications in spelling have included folk etymology alterations (see belfry, crayfish, gillyflower, gingerbread, penthouse, pickaxe).

Furthermore, the spelling of some words was changed to keep the pronunciation as close to the original as possible (e.g. leaven), whereas in other cases the French spelling was kept and resulted in totally different pronunciation than French (e.g. leopard, levee). Terms that most recently entered the English language have kept French pronunciation and spelling (aplomb, barrage, brochure, bureau, dossier, garage, machine, mirage, panache, café, décor, bourgeoisie, ennui, espionage, élite, expertise, intrigue, liaison, lingerie, armoire, critique, genre, ambiance, collage, montage, plaque, penchant, repertoire, entourage, terrain, glacier, debris, tranche, entrepreneur, financier, arbitrage), though this may change with time (e.g. the initial h in hotel is not silent anymore, consider also the evolving pronunciation of herb, or garage). Expressions like femme fatale, bête noire, enfant terrible are still recognisably French.

Borrowings are not a one-way process (See Reborrowing), some words of French origin ultimately come from Old English (Anglo-Saxon words) : e.g. : bateau, chiffon, gourmet. While conversely English words of French origin made their way "back" into Modern French : budget, challenge, design, fuel, gay, gin, humour, interview, jury, management, mess, pedigree, record, spleen, sport, squat, standard, suspense, tennis, ticket, toast, toboggan, tunnel, vintage.

A-C

D-I

J-R

S-Z

Learn more »

Economic history is the study of economies or economic phenomena of the past. Analysis in economic history is undertaken using a combination of historical methods, statistical methods and the application of economic theory to historical situations and institutions. The topic includes financial and business history and overlaps with areas of social history such as demographic and labor history. The quantitative â€" in this case, econometric â€" study of economic history is also known as cliometrics.

Development as a separate field

In Germany in the late 19th century, scholars in a number of universities, led by Gustav von Schmoller, developed the historical school of economic history. It ignored quantitative and mathematical approaches. Historical approach dominated German and French scholarship for most of the 20th century. The approach was spread to Great Britain by William Ashley, 1860-1927, and dominated British economic history for much of the 20th century. In France, economic history was heavily influenced by the Annales School from the early 20th century to the present. It exerts a worldwide influence through its Journal Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales.

Treating economic history as a discrete academic discipline has been a contentious issue for many years. Academics at the London School of Economics and the University of Cambridge had numerous disputes over the separation of economics and economic history in the interwar era. Cambridge economists believed that pure economics involved a component of economic history and that the two were inseparably entangled. Those at the LSE believed that economic history warranted its own courses, research agenda and academic chair separated from mainstream economics.

In the initial period of the subject's development, the LSE position of separating economic history from economics won out. Many universities in the UK developed independent programmes in economic history rooted in the LSE model. Indeed, the Economic History Society had its inauguration at LSE in 1926 and the University of Cambridge eventually established its own economic history programme. However, the past twenty years have witnessed the widespread closure of these separate programmes in the UK and the integration of the discipline into either history or economics departments. Only the LSE retains a separate economic history department and stand-alone undergraduate and graduate programme in economic history. Cambridge, Glasgow, the LSE and Oxford together train the vast majority of economic historians coming through the British higher education system today.

United States

Meanwhile, in the US, the field of economic history has in recent decades been largely subsumed into other fields of economics and is seen as a form of applied economics. As a consequence, there are no specialist economic history graduate programs at any universities anywhere in the country. Economic history remains as a special field component of regular economics or history PhD programs in universities including at University of California, Berkeley, Harvard University, Northwestern University and Yale University.

Economic history and economics

Yale University economist Irving Fisher wrote in 1933 on the relationship between economics and economic history in his "Debt-Deflation Theory of Great Depressions" (Econometrica, Vol. 1, No. 4: 337â€"338):

The study of dis-equilibrium may proceed in either of two ways. We may take as our unit for study an actual historical case of great dis-equilibrium, such as, say, the panic of 1873; or we may take as our unit for study any constituent tendency, such as, say, deflation, and discover its general laws, relations to, and combinations with, other tendencies. The former study revolves around events, or facts; the latter, around tendencies. The former is primarily economic history; the latter is primarily economic science. Both sorts of studies are proper and important. Each helps the other. The panic of 1873 can only be understood in light of the various tendencies involvedâ€"deflation and other; and deflation can only be understood in the light of various historical manifestationsâ€"1873 and other.

There is a school of thought among economic historians that splits economic historyâ€"the study of how economic phenomena evolved in the pastâ€"from historical economicsâ€"testing the generality of economic theory using historical episodes. US economic historian Charles P. Kindleberger explained this position in his 1990 book Historical Economics: Art or Science?.

The new economic history, also known as cliometrics, refers to the systematic use of economic theory and/or econometric techniques to the study of economic history. The term cliometrics was originally coined by Jonathan R. T. Hughes and Stanley Reiter in 1960 and refers to Clio, who was the muse of history and heroic poetry in Greek mythology. Cliometricians argue their approach is necessary because the application of theory is crucial in writing solid economic history, while historians generally oppose this view warning against the risk of generating anachronisms. Early cliometrics was a type of counterfactual history. However, counterfactualism is no longer its distinctive feature. Some have argued that cliometrics had its heyday in the 1960s and 1970s and that it is now neglected by economists and historians.

In recent decades economic historians, following Douglass North, have tended to move away from narrowly quantitative studies toward institutional, social, and cultural history affecting the evolution of economies. However, this trend has been criticized, most forcefully by Francesco Boldizzoni, as a form of economic imperialism "extending the neoclassical explanatory model to the realm of social relations." Conversely, economists in other specializations have started to write on topics concerning economic history.

Economic history and the history of capitalism

A new field calling itself the "History of Capitalism" has emerged in US history departments since about the year 2000. It includes many topics traditionally associated with the field of economic history, such as insurance, banking and regulation, the political dimension of business, and the impact of capitalism on the middle classes, the poor and women and minorities. The field utilizes the existing research of business history, but has sought to make it more relevant to the concerns of history departments in the United States, including by having limited or no discussion of individual business enterprises.

Nobel Memorial Prize-winning economic historians

• Simon Kuznets won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences ("the Nobel Memorial Prize") in 1971 "for his empirically founded interpretation of economic growth which has led to new and deepened insight into the economic and social structure and process of development".
• Milton Friedman won the Nobel Memorial Prize in 1976 for "his achievements in the fields of consumption analysis, monetary history and theory and for his demonstration of the complexity of stabilization policy".
• Robert Fogel and Douglass North won the Nobel Memorial Prize in 1993 for "having renewed research in economic history by applying economic theory and quantitative methods in order to explain economic and institutional change".
• Merton Miller, who started his academic career teaching economic history at the LSE, won the Nobel Memorial Prize in 1990 with Harry Markowitz and William F. Sharpe.

Notable economic historians

Learn more »