The guy said - the guy did

On April 15, US President Joe Biden, as expected, signed a decree "On blocking property for certain sabotage actions of the government of the Russian Federation."

This decree created the legal basis for the introduction of new sanctions against Russia for:

- Attempts to undermine democratic elections in the United States and its allied countries;

- Involvement in hacker attacks on the infrastructure of the United States and allied countries;

- Transnational corruption in order to influence foreign governments;

- Attempts to harm dissidents and journalists outside Russian territory (in fact, for the poisoning of Alexei Navalny (violation of the law banning chemical weapons));

- Damage to the security of countries and regions important to the national security of the United States, including violation of the territorial integrity of other countries.

In accordance with this decree by Biden, on June 2 new sanctions against Russia should be introduced. Of course, Russia categorically rejects all the charges, but this does not interest anyone, since everyone knows that Russia will never admit anything, even the obvious.

 The sanctions provide for:

- Expulsion of 10 diplomats associated with the Russian special services from the United States;

- blocking 10 individuals and 16 legal entities associated with the sanctioning actions. In particular, structures operating in the Military-Industrial Complex and intelligence will be blocked: Technopolis "ERA", JSC "Pasit", Federal State Autonomous Scientific Institution "Research Institute of Specialized Computing Devices and Security Automation", LLC "Neobit ", JSC" Advanced system technologies ", JSC" Positive Technologies ".

- Restrictions on the purchase of new issues of the Russian government debt.

However, it should be admitted that the first two points of the sanctions for the Russian leadership are nothing. Only the last one is not too big, but a nuisance.

The first such restrictions (a ban on the purchase of new issues of Russian public debt denominated in foreign currency) were introduced by US President Donald Trump on August 2, 2019 in connection with the Skripals case.

In fact, it was a mosquito bite, since the borrowings of the Russian Ministry of Finance on foreign markets are scanty. The current prick is a little more serious, since it provides for a ban on the purchase of FLB (Federal Loan Bonds) - ruble bonds issued by the Bank of Russia, the National Wealth Fund or the Russian Ministry of Finance) issued after June 14, 2021. It is also prohibited to provide loans to these structures in rubles or other currencies, including in rubles.

All this will somewhat complicate and raise the cost of placing new FLB issues, nothing more. At the same time, this decree gives the US government the right, if necessary, to extend sanctions on Russia's national debt.

All this will somewhat complicate and raise the cost of placing new FLB issues, nothing more. At the same time, this decree gives the US government the right, if necessary, to extend sanctions on Russia's national debt.

"The government will expand sanctions on sovereign debt against Russia if necessary," the White House said in a statement. It is quite possible that this is preparation for - a complete ban on transactions with Russian government debt for American companies. The introduction of such a ban will lead to the fact that American FLB holders will urgently sell them and transfer funds from rubles to dollars in order to take them home. This is fraught with a sharp rise in FLB yields and a fall in the ruble exchange rate.

Yet these are far from the sanctions promised by the White House. There is no question of disconnecting Russia from SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications) and the oil embargo, which were on Biden's table. Although, after the verbal attack on Russian leader Vladimir Putin, during a sensational interview with political analyst and ABC News TV presenter George Stephanopoulos on March 17, the situation began to escalate more and more. In response to NATO's annual multinational joint exercise Defender Europe 2021, Russia has deployed two armies and three airborne units to the Ukrainian border.

Fifteen ships of the Caspian Flotilla were deployed to the Black Sea, including three artillery and eight landing boats, as well as support vessels, 2 landing ships (BDK) of the Baltic Fleet and 2 BDK of the Northern Fleet of Russia. In addition, over 50 aircraft are deployed over the Black Sea. As Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said at a meeting in Severomorsk on April 13, the troops were sent "to the areas where combat training missions are being performed." This was done in response to threats from the North Atlantic Alliance, the head of the department explained. “In response to the military activity of the alliance that threatens Russia, we have taken appropriate measures,” he stressed.

The transfer of the armed forces to the borders of Ukraine, according to the minister, is to complete within two weeks. 

After that, like a bolt from the blue, on April 13, the news appears that President Biden himself called Putin (this is emphasized). They talked for some time and along with other non-significant issues, the main thing sounded - the US President suggested considering the possibility of holding a personal summit meeting in the near future. 

It looked like Putin was trying to do just that - Biden's call looked like a consequence of the concentration of the Russian armed forces on the borders of Ukraine.

Psychologically, it looks like one of the simplest models of game theory "Hawks and Doves" when two drivers rush to meet each other and the loser is the one who is the first to be afraid of a head-on collision and turn aside. This fits perfectly into the narrative of Russian propaganda - “Biden turned down,” and this thesis is now being exploited 100% by all propaganda resources of Russia.

However, this is unlikely to negate such a fundamental thing as the very specific assurances of the United States Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, given to his Ukrainian counterpart Andrey Taran, that Washington will support Kiev in the event of an escalation in the Donbas.  This determination to resist aggression, of course, is not the personal opinion of Austin or even Biden. This is the position of the deep state and it is unlikely to give up this position. True, it is not clear how the United States is going to do this?

It is obvious that Biden's call only strengthened the positions of those forces in the Kremlin expecting to take revenge for the collapse of the USSR.

The text of the "redoubt" following a telephone conversation on the website of the US President also raises a lot of questions, where Ukraine is mentioned at the end and only in passing (and this is in the midst of the campaign against Ukraine), and not a word is said about Alexei Navalny.

The first part of the letter is devoted to strategic stability,  Start Treaty between the United States and Russia on Measures to Further Reduce and Limit Strategic Offensive Arms, etc., although today this treaty is an absolute dummy.

A great breakthrough was the first such ABM Treaty I (Strategic arms limitation) in 1972, when the parties realized that they could destroy each other and therefore a nuclear war was impossible. The so-called Mutual Assured Destruction doctrine was born. The essence of the START Treaty boils down to the fact that the United States and Russia can destroy each other several times, so they agree not to expand their strategic arsenals, since there is no point in repeatedly destroying each other. Therefore, the START III treaty was extended within 5 minutes. However, it is precisely the task of the Kremlin to make of this the greatest, global topic for discussion, and the White House went with him.

Although Biden's call, most likely, will not have any consequences in the specific US policy and their further reaction to further steps by Russia, but as already mentioned, this will generate confidence among the "revanchists", since they will feel impunity.

It looks like Biden has deviated from his original line on the Kremlin (the reason for this should be clarified). This is confirmed by the fact that Biden deployed two destroyers bound for the Black Sea. Against the background of the aggravation of the situation in Donbass, the Pentagon changed its mind about entering the Black Sea in order to "avoid unnecessary escalation [of the conflict]", Politico reported, citing its own sources.

At the same time, one of the sources noted, the sending  American ships to the Black Sea was not something special and was not intended as a specific signal to the Russian authorities, since the American fleet conducts eight or nine such movements every year.

This particular passage of ships was canceled for a variety of reasons, including a reluctance to "provoke Moscow." 

However, there are supporters of the version that Biden's call and his words about de-escalation are in fact the speech of an experienced, hardened politician who wants to check whether Putin will agree to the summit on Biden's terms (without apologies after the scandalous interview).

Allegedly calling Putin a murderer and immediately inviting him to meet on neutral territory, Biden made a strong move. Now, Putin needs to get out of the stalemate. He, as the head of a great power, should not go to a meeting with the offender without receiving satisfaction. However, because Russia is one of the greatest nuclear powers responsible for the fate of the planet, it will be difficult for Putin to abandon the dialogue.

Thus, Russia, represented by Putin, is to choose between bad and worse. To refuse a meeting means to establish itself in the status of a rogue state, headed by a tough and at the same time irresponsible politician. Agree - to show yourself as a responsible, but weak leader.

How will Putin behave in such a situation? There are two possible scenarios:

1. He may at first refuse to meet in order to raise the stakes (degree of escalation) and only after that agree to the meeting. The Kremlin needs bullish play for pragmatic reasons. Obviously, the central issue on the agenda of this meeting will be the issue of the escalation of military tension by Russia on the border with Ukraine, as an important element of European security. If Russia's consent to participate in the summit is nevertheless given, then this in itself will inevitably reduce the degree of escalation so much that there will be no large-scale military clash before the summit. There can be only local skirmishes. However, Kremlin is hardly interested in it. After all, the escalation started in order to force Ukraine to provide the occupied Crimea with water for the summer season. Consequently, Russia is rather not interested in reducing tensions before the fall, and, consequently, in an early meeting of the presidents.

2. Perhaps he will not agree to a meeting without receiving satisfaction. Because, this will deal a blow to both the prestige of Russia and the image of Putin as a "tough macho", which he has been forming for as many as 20 years. To implement its plans, Russia is trying to be known as an extremely dangerous state, so further escalation cannot be ruled out.