Irish Examiner view: Sanctions against Russia have yet to make impact

The regime of Russian president Vladimir Putin is already finding ways around the existing sanctions with apparent ease. Picture: Alexander Nemenov/AP

For those keeping score, the EU has settled on its 17th round of sanctions against Russia. 

Countries must formally agree to the proposals, but that is expected to happen in the coming days. 

This means sanctions will be imposed on Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet”.

These are ships being used by Russia to circumvent sanctions on the movement of goods, which begs an obvious question of the sanction system. 

France’s foreign minister Jean-Noël Barrot provided an answer to that question when speaking to a TV news channel.

“We will need to go further because the sanctions so far have not dissuaded Vladimir Putin from continuing his war of aggression,” he said.

“We must prepare to expand devastating sanctions that could suffocate, once and for all, Russia’s economy.”

It was a candid declaration on a couple of fronts.

First, Mr Barrot acknowledged the obvious — that Russia is not being deterred from its savage attacks on Ukraine by sanctions. 

The fact that these latest initiatives are targeting the “shadow fleet” underlines that very fact: The regime of Russian president Vladimir Putin is already finding ways around the existing sanctions with apparent ease.

In that context, calling for action which will “suffocate” the Russian economy is a bold move.

Any such measures would clearly need to be direct and targeted to be effective. 

When Mr Barrot suggests that “devastating” sanctions are needed, that is an unambiguous statement of intent which commits the EU as a whole to punish Russia for its aggression in Ukraine. 

It is not the kind of statement which Mr Putin is likely to ignore. 

If it leads to action, he is likely to respond in due course.

There is also a wider question here about the basic efficacy of sanctions, given the French statement that they have not “dissuaded” Russia from attacking Ukraine. 

However, the wider philosophical implications of that statement will have to wait as we see what measures to “suffocate” the Russian economy mean in reality.

Garda Kevin Flatley: Misinformation runs unchecked

The death of Garda Kevin Flatley last weekend reminds us of the dangers faced by gardaí on duty every day, and the outpouring of grief and sympathy since then is an acknowledgement of the loss suffered by his family and colleagues. 

Garda Flatley died when he was struck by a high-powered Yamaha motorcycle during a speed check in Dublin on Sunday.

The warnings which An Garda Síochána has had to issue since then have been notable. 

Not about the dangers of road travel, but about misleading social media posts. 

On Wednesday, a Garda statement referred to purported eye-witness accounts of the accident on social media in unambiguous terms: “The commentary being circulated online is completely inaccurate and has no basis whatsoever in fact.

“This type of misinformation also risks diverting garda resources and time from what is a complex and ongoing investigation into this collision.” 

It is difficult to understand the mindset of an individual seeking to leverage someone’s death, and the catastrophic loss being endured by a family, purely to draw attention to him or herself online.

Books of condolences for the late Garda Kevin Flatley at O'Dwyers GAA Club, Balbriggan, Dublin. Picture: Colin Keegan

The Garda point about wasting valuable time and resources which should be focused on a challenging investigation is well made. 

The fact that point had to be made at all should tell readers a good deal about our society. 

It should not be too surprising — it is not so long ago we were appalled by people filming a man drowning in the River Lee rather than coming to his aid, after all.

However, the Garda statement also poses another question — must our police force now patrol social media for misinformation? 

This is not the first time An Garda Síochána has had to issue a statement to clarify and correct rumour and untruth on social media, and it is surely not ideal for the force to have to keep an eye on such websites while also carrying out investigations.

Given their vast wealth and near-unlimited resources, the social media companies themselves should be doing that work. 

Long experience has shown us not to expect such service to the community from those companies, however.

Menendez brothers: Case of change

Names redolent of another time have returned to the headlines this week, with news that the Menendez brothers are now eligible for parole in California.

Erik and Lyle Menendez killed their parents in 1989, and were sentenced to life in prison seven years later. 

That bald statement hardly does justice to the media sensation their trial caused at the time.

Last week, a judge resentenced the brothers — making them eligible for parole as early as next month. 

Erik and Lyle Menendez. Picture: California Dept of Corrections via AP

Though the district attorney argued that they had not been rehabilitated, the judge also heard plenty of testimony from the brothers’ relatives and those who worked with them in prison.

He heard about the educational courses they completed and programmes they had created to improve the lives of inmates, including a hospice initiative to help the elderly and sick.

At the hearing, the brothers acknowledged they had killed their mother and father — they argued at their original trial that they had been abused by their parents for years — and said they wished to work with abuse victims if they were released from prison.

Notwithstanding the parole board decision next month, are the Menendez brothers the ultimate example of rehabilitation? 

Their three decades in prison appear to have been transformative — a far cry from their youth as tabloid fodder.