I am not in favor of economic (as well as political) sanctions to be referred to liberally. Before coming to that point, every possible diplomatic means need to be examined. In an unfavorable national political context, maintaining the status quo until a more favorable situation arises in its natural cause (without intervention or crisis) would be preferable over a forced change if behavior to one's favor. Because, I believe, this latter option is not as sustainable as the former.
BD is no different.
Major countries, because of their sheer size and scale, cannot/should not make drastic/dramatic moves unless absolutely necessary. Small countries can sway wildly (like Turkey) without much impact, but big countries swaying so wildly will definitely affect international conditions to the worse.
US' inter-agency rivalry (basically Pentagon and CIA rivalry) in Syria has contributed to its less clear Syria policy, which has translated into the protracted crisis.
Russia's principled and solid interest-based approach is very much distinguished from that of the US, in this respect. And one can see the practical result of the actions of two nations.
China should be in control, but not be seen as aggressively moving without regard to the national conditions in BD. It is a fact that every one of our countries under various pressures inside and outside, and small countries are more vulnerable to them, hence, their actions might not always reflect their preferred choice of action.
@terranMarine ,
@ahojunk ,
@vostok ,
@AndrewJin
