EU could stop Russian GP from being held

[Londoner]

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2014/09/03/f1-fanatic-round-up-0309-2/

What's going to be interesting here is that we all know, short of all-out war breaking out in Russia and Eastern Europe (which won't happen, I'm fairly sure of it), Bernie isn't gonna cancel the race. I wonder how he and the FIA will react if any sanctions are placed on the race, and how they will attempt to get around it.

Discuss, although I fear this could open a massive can of worms...

[Rob Dylan]

I saw that article, and most of them just starting politically ranting at each other.

IMO the EU doesn't have much to say about cancelling the Russian GP when they are one of the parties involved in the Ukraine situation in the first place. They are causing trouble, same as the Russians are, so what would cancelling the Grand Prix hope to do, except for create more trouble? The Sochi track isn't in the surrounding area, just let them race and let the fans enjoy themselves.

But that's just my opinion.

[DemocalypseNow]

The EU can posture about this all they like, but nothing short of the member states sending in troops to Sochi and physically barricading the track is going to stop the Russian GP from going ahead.

Bernie strikes me as someone who simply does not care about politics whatsoever. He will go there, pick up his cheque and leave, without a care in the world for whatever bad press he and F1 gets from those with the moral high ground on the issue.

[Wallio]

Forgive this question if it is patronizing and/or opens another can of worms, but how much power does the EU actually have? We Americans were always told they were more of a figurehead. Is this true? Or can they actually stop (or attempt to stop) the GP?

[DemocalypseNow]

Forgive this question if it is patronizing and/or opens another can of worms, but how much power does the EU actually have? We Americans were always told they were more of a figurehead. Is this true? Or can they actually stop (or attempt to stop) the GP?

It's not at all patrionsing, it's a very legitimate question that politicians of EU countries won't stop talking about. And in all honesty, it seems no-one is quite sure where the EU draws a line on its own juristiction.

Right wing parties tend to talk about how the EU wants their fingers in all the pies. About how they have too much control and so on. Now, I'm not a euro-sceptic myself, I can actually see that it does some good, but I do worry from time to time they like to make themselves seem a bigger deal than they really are.

When push comes to shove, there's really very little the EU can do beyond what they've already been doing - punishing Russia financially via trade deals with the West. There's nothing in their power to actually cancel a sporting event on Russian soil. Their only way to make a point would be to remove any financial incentives that FOM/CVC, the FIA or any of the teams get via the EU - that assuming they get any in the first place, of which I have no idea whatsoever.

In short, the EU have some powers, but none that have any sort of juristiction over a sporting event on their own territorry, never mind someone else's!

[mrfakeboullier]

Although surely the EU could threaten to look at FOM's "monopoly" over the commercial rights of F1 if the Russian GP went ahead

[Wallio]

Forgive this question if it is patronizing and/or opens another can of worms, but how much power does the EU actually have? We Americans were always told they were more of a figurehead. Is this true? Or can they actually stop (or attempt to stop) the GP?

It's not at all patrionsing, it's a very legitimate question that politicians of EU countries won't stop talking about. And in all honesty, it seems no-one is quite sure where the EU draws a line on its own juristiction.

Right wing parties tend to talk about how the EU wants their fingers in all the pies. About how they have too much control and so on. Now, I'm not a euro-sceptic myself, I can actually see that it does some good, but I do worry from time to time they like to make themselves seem a bigger deal than they really are.

When push comes to shove, there's really very little the EU can do beyond what they've already been doing - punishing Russia financially via trade deals with the West. There's nothing in their power to actually cancel a sporting event on Russian soil. Their only way to make a point would be to remove any financial incentives that FOM/CVC, the FIA or any of the teams get via the EU - that assuming they get any in the first place, of which I have no idea whatsoever.

In short, the EU have some powers, but none that have any sort of juristiction over a sporting event on their own territorry, never mind someone else's!

Ah, thanks for the info. Makes sense. I wonder though, if countries could put pressure on teams and drivers (whether high handed by the EU or not) to not race, like the South African GPs of the 80s?

[tommykl]

Yeah, the EU's main influence is standardising things like agriculture, economy and trade to make things a lot easier on the continental market, as well as serving as a convenient sole representative for all its members. It tends to give a lot of autonomy to each country, just as long as it stays within the rules.

The EU certainly has the power to do quite a lot of things. If a member nation is being naughty, it can impose financial sanctions, like it did to Greece, Ireland or Portugal. But apart from emergency situations, it usually decides to advise solutions instead of enforcing them. They could enforce them, they just choose not to.

Now, regarding the Grand Prix, the EU doesn't have much say in whether Sochi can happen. Russia isn't a member nation, so it can't simply shut it down. Imposing tougher economic sanctions on Russia (such as embargoes) for a sporting event is ludicrous, and the EU knows that. And having the police arrest any European who took part in the race weekend would be equally ludicrous. In other words, the EU's nature doesn't put it in a brilliant position to prevent the race from happening. Presumably, like Biscione said, they could heavily fine CVC, which would be the action that would look the least like a failed attempt at a symbolic gesture.

And Biscione, one of the reasons why the EU doesn't appear to do much in Britain is quite a lot down to the UK having an enormous amount of opt-outs. The EU has more power on the continent than in the British Isles or even Scandinavia, which also has a few opt-outs.

[Nessafox]

Is it possible for the EU to forbid all of their citizens and EU-registered companies from going to Sochi? I doubt that they would do such a thing, even if it was possible.

[Miguel98]

Is it possible for the EU to forbid all of their citizens and EU-registered companies from going to Sochi? I doubt that they would do such a thing, even if it was possible.

I highly doubt it they can, and even if they could, they probably wouldn't do it.

[mario]

Forgive this question if it is patronizing and/or opens another can of worms, but how much power does the EU actually have? We Americans were always told they were more of a figurehead. Is this true? Or can they actually stop (or attempt to stop) the GP?

It's not at all patrionsing, it's a very legitimate question that politicians of EU countries won't stop talking about. And in all honesty, it seems no-one is quite sure where the EU draws a line on its own juristiction.

Right wing parties tend to talk about how the EU wants their fingers in all the pies. About how they have too much control and so on. Now, I'm not a euro-sceptic myself, I can actually see that it does some good, but I do worry from time to time they like to make themselves seem a bigger deal than they really are.

When push comes to shove, there's really very little the EU can do beyond what they've already been doing - punishing Russia financially via trade deals with the West. There's nothing in their power to actually cancel a sporting event on Russian soil. Their only way to make a point would be to remove any financial incentives that FOM/CVC, the FIA or any of the teams get via the EU - that assuming they get any in the first place, of which I have no idea whatsoever.

In short, the EU have some powers, but none that have any sort of juristiction over a sporting event on their own territorry, never mind someone else's!

Ah, thanks for the info. Makes sense. I wonder though, if countries could put pressure on teams and drivers (whether high handed by the EU or not) to not race, like the South African GPs of the 80s?

It is possible that the EU Commission could push individual member states to issue travel bans or otherwise find ways of making it harder for people to travel to Russia, such as suspending or seizing passports.

That said, it is possible that Russia would then find alternative methods to get around such a move - in the case of South Africa, the government there would issue temporary identity cards to team members which could be used instead of a passport. That way, those working in the sport would not have to risk having their passport suspended or revoked if it was found that they were applying for a South African visa or their passport was stamped by the South African border police.

Biscione is right that, alternatively, the EU might look at ways of preventing the Russians from paying for the event - the US has already formally barred a number of Russian financial institutions from being able to carry out any sort of financial transactions within the US, and similar, albeit less extensive, measures have also been introduced by the EU.

In that scenario, the EU could look at ways of blocking the flow of capital from Russia to either CVC or the teams, since FOM is likely to listen much more closely if they are not going to be paid or face the threat of an investigation for money laundering. That said, I suspect that what would simply happen is that the Russians would use the Swizz banking system to get around that in much the same way that transactions for the South African government in the 1980's were routinely channelled through Switzerland - the Swizz are, at the moment, not signed up to the financial sanctions the EU and US have imposed.

[roblo97]

I think it best to reserve judgement on this issue until after the peace talks between President Putin, President Poroshenko and the separatist leaders.

[CoopsII]

Any sanctions will be a waste of time and done to make it look like 'the west' are taking steps when in fact they aren't. I work in the food industry and I know for a fact that any ban on exporting foodstuffs to Russia will just mean the exports will go into Russia via Belarus, the latter not being on anybody's list of countries to sanction and which enjoys good relations with the former.

When such things are possible it just show's the F1 race, no matter what paperwork the EU produces, will go ahead just fine.

[DanielPT]

Any sanctions will be a waste of time and done to make it look like 'the west' are taking steps when in fact they aren't. I work in the food industry and I know for a fact that any ban on exporting foodstuffs to Russia will just mean the exports will go into Russia via Belarus, the latter not being on anybody's list of countries to sanction and which enjoys good relations with the former.

When such things are possible it just show's the F1 race, no matter what paperwork the EU produces, will go ahead just fine.

One easy way to check that the sanctions from the UE are a complete joke is that if it was serious, Germany would have, by now, stopped receiving the juicy flow from Russia's natural gas...

[CoopsII]

One easy way to check that the sanctions from the UE are a complete joke is that if it was serious, Germany would have, by now, stopped receiving the juicy flow from Russia's natural gas...

I don't know why but just lately I'm seeing alot of sexual connotations in your posts.

[DanielPT]

One easy way to check that the sanctions from the UE are a complete joke is that if it was serious, Germany would have, by now, stopped receiving the juicy flow from Russia's natural gas...

I don't know why but just lately I'm seeing alot of sexual connotations in your posts.

I can tell you it is not intentional. More, it is not something I manage to see when I write. Perhaps it is your mind being fine tuned!

[Captain Hammer]

The EU can posture about this all they like, but nothing short of the member states sending in troops to Sochi and physically barricading the track is going to stop the Russian GP from going ahead.

Bernie strikes me as someone who simply does not care about politics whatsoever. He will go there, pick up his cheque and leave, without a care in the world for whatever bad press he and F1 gets from those with the moral high ground on the issue.

At the risk of being branded a Russophile - I've been called worse - this is probably the right attitude to take.

Consider this: at the time of the Euromaidan protests, the Yanukovych government was democratically elected. His decision to back down on EU integration was not a popular one, but nor was it a case of the people wanting one thing and the President doing another - moving towards the EU would have been good for the western half of the country, but the eastern half is heavily reliant on Russia to support their manufacturing economy. If Ukraine joined the EU, the eastern part of the country would suffer.

To further complicate things, one of the first acts the interim government passed was to repeal legislation making Russian an official language of the country. This would have meant that things like court hearings and school classes would only be carried out in Ukrainian, which would have immediately ostracised large parts of the ethnic Russian population in the east. The interim leader wisely stopped this legislation with his veto power, but the damage had been done - to people in the east, the perception was that Kiev wanted nothing to do with them.

By this time, Yanukovych had made it out of Ukraine, and appealed to the Kremlin. Moscow recognised the Yanukovych government as the elected government of Ukraine, and sought to provide support, as per the terms of a treaty between Moscow and Kiev. Putin essentially did what Obama is doing in Iraq - responding to a request from an elected government and ally to support stability and overcome the threat posed by an insurgency.

In the case of MH17, the extent of Russia's involvement has not been established. Did they mishandle it? Probably. But can you blame them? I'm less certain. MH17 was shot down at 12:15am AEST. I went to work at 8:30am, class started at 9:00am, and I had a free period at 9:45am, at which point I checked out the news. Our Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, addressed parliament some time in that forty-five minute window, and during that address, he labelled the shoot-down as a deliberate attack, and accused Russia of being involved. However, I could not find any independent confirmation of MH17 being shot down for another two hours. While Abbott no doubt has better sources than I, and the global community also accused Russia (but not, I hasten to add, for another eight hours), the Australian response was singled out by Russia as inappropriate. Abbott essentially accused a soverign nation of supporting, if not actively participating in, an act of terror* - and then he went on to call for a full and independent investigation into the incident. Russia might not have endeared themselves to anyone with their response, but I think they have a right to be upset when world leaders accuse them wrongdoing with one breath and then demand an independent investigation with the next.

This whole situation in the Ukraine has never been clear-cut. It's not a case of tyranny crushing democracy and Bernie turning a blind eye. It's like people demanding that the Sochi Olympics be taken from Russia because of their "anti-gay" laws. Russia is an extremely conservative country - when Pussy Riot performed in front of a church altar, it triggered massive protests on the street - and while homosexuality is tolerated, it's certainly not approved of. What right did the eirld have to demand that Russians put aside their cultural and religious beliefs for the sake of a handful of people? I'm by no means suggesting that the needs of the few should be sacrificed for the needs of the many, just that sacrificing the needs of the many for the sake of the few is not an appropriate response. What right does Formula 1 have to wade in and make sweeping declarations on complex political, moral and religious issues that the sport has no knowledge of, is not affected by, and is only coming under pressure to satisfy the moral demands of a handful of people who are completely separate from the issue?

* - It's also worth noting that Abbott fancies himself as a major global political player, and clearly thinks that he can bring Putin to heel. There's no public demand for this - he's faced endless criticism for his domestic policies, and needed something to save face. When the cease-fire between Kiev and the separatists was brokered, our Foreign Minister's words were positive, but her body language made it pretty clear that the government wasn't happy with it, simply because they hadn't been involved in it.

[DanielPT]

--- Huge text ---

A good, truthful post there Captain. Of course it may earn you calls of Russophile but only because you do not clearly support the Western side. The media coming from this side are traditionally biased althought not less biased than the Russian ones. This creates much misinformation and it is hard to separate real data and facts from propaganda. What can be said is that the whole mess in Russia and the Middle East is that the Western civilization likes to impose their culture and their values to "less advanced" as being the best ones to have, usually taking the moral high ground. And they sometimes like to do this by force. Obviously no one likes to be "civilized" by force. I mean, what would be our reaction if an alien race came and started to impose their values and culture? Would the majority of the political powers just accept it like that? I highly doubt it and it just shows how badly handled those situations are.

[Captain Hammer]

It's not that I do or don't support a side. More that I don't understand why there is this imperative for Formula 1 to make a popular stand on an issue that I know to be too complex for an absolute moral judgement. To my mind, all it really achieves is to give the everyman among us peace of mind and a good night's sleep, convinced that the things that they value are righteous or ethical - but what we consider to be ethical is purely subjective.

[Rocks with Salt]

I really hate to be the alarmist here, but when you study Islamic jihad groups it kind of becomes inevitable. Yes, there is fallout over the whole Russia/separatists vs. Ukraine debacle, but I'm still concerned about the Caucasus Emirate that holes up in the mountains near Sochi along the Georgian border. In late 2013 I made this grand prediction that based on the seeming increase in terrorist attacks on Russian soil late last year that the Emirate was gearing up for an attack on Sochi during the Olympics. Well that didn't happen. But considering how much security there was compared to how much security there is for a Formula 1 race, I still feel concerned they might try something. Maybe it's just paranoia, but they have a history...

[Dj_bereta]

Well, F1 almost raced in Bahrain filled with civil war (Blame Bernie). So, I think these diplomatic issues of Russia with EU won't stop Sochi Grand Prix

[mario]

Without getting too into the politics of the situation, there is perhaps one aspect that can be addressed.

In the case of MH17, the extent of Russia's involvement has not been established. Did they mishandle it? Probably. But can you blame them? I'm less certain. MH17 was shot down at 12:15am AEST. I went to work at 8:30am, class started at 9:00am, and I had a free period at 9:45am, at which point I checked out the news. Our Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, addressed parliament some time in that forty-five minute window, and during that address, he labelled the shoot-down as a deliberate attack, and accused Russia of being involved. However, I could not find any independent confirmation of MH17 being shot down for another two hours. While Abbott no doubt has better sources than I, and the global community also accused Russia (but not, I hasten to add, for another eight hours), the Australian response was singled out by Russia as inappropriate. Abbott essentially accused a soverign nation of supporting, if not actively participating in, an act of terror* - and then he went on to call for a full and independent investigation into the incident. Russia might not have endeared themselves to anyone with their response, but I think they have a right to be upset when world leaders accuse them wrongdoing with one breath and then demand an independent investigation with the next.

Establishing the extent of Russian involvement with the shooting down of MH17 is going to be a difficult question to answer, and indeed may never be fully answered.

For a start, although a Dutch investigation was able to recover some of the debris, sections of the crash site that are under control of the separatists are still off limits to international observers, so the possibility of degradation or deliberate tampering with evidence is a real concern.
Furthermore, the type of mobile missile launcher that is thought to have been used - a Buk 3 tracked unit - is in combat service with both the Russian and Ukrainian military; it is also known that the separatists publicly announced that they had captured a number of Buk 3's after overrunning a Ukrainian military base, so whatever remains of the missile is unlikely to yield many clues about who might have fired it.

As things stand, the involvement of Russia in the shooting down remains unclear, with the only thing that seems to be reasonably certain is that the missile was probably fired by the separatists (whilst the Russians have tried to push the blame onto the Ukrainians, at the moment they have not published any evidence to back up their assertions).
At the time, the separatists had been extremely active in that area, shooting down a Ukrainian Antonov An-26 transport aircraft on the 14th, only three days earlier, before shooting down one Sukhoi-25 and severely damaging a second Su-25, which was forced into an emergency landing, on the 16th July, with all of those aircraft being engaged in close proximity to the site where MH17 was shot down. Where the missile launcher came from and whom it was crewed by remains unclear - as things stand, the most probable scenario is that the equipment was captured Ukrainian hardware, although a handful of European and Russian journalists have claimed the equipment was Russian (as has Ilya Ponomarev, a member of the Russian Duma - which appears to have drawn a harsh response from the Russian authorities, whom have promptly frozen his bank accounts and stripped him of his rights to leave Russia).

[Captain Hammer]

I suspect that the plane was shot down by accident. The separatists had been targeting Ukrainian military transports the week before, and probably didn't realise that the missile battery had picked up a commercial flight.

That's beside the point, though. Lots of people have called for the Russian Grand Prix to be abandoned as punishment for Moscow's role in the shoot-down - but Moscow's role has not been established. We've got world leaders alternating between accusing the Kremlin of being responsible and demanding an independent investigation. How can an independent investigation be independent when those calling for it are already stringing up a noose, and doing it for political purposes? And why should Formula 1 be obligated to make a stand on that issue that does not necessarily represent or reflect the views of everyone in the sport.

The only reason why a race should be cancelled is because there is a threat to the safety and security of drivers, team personnel, officials, the media and spectators.

[solarcold]

Just a couple of words from a Russan mouth

I certainly don't like Russian anti-gay attitude and Russian religion. But does it really have to do with Olympics?
Similarily, does Russian policy (which is probably not as bad as described in your media) really have to do with F1?
I doubt that. Don't mess sports with politics >:(

[CoopsII]

Don't mess sports with politics >:(

We shouldnt but politicians often get involved with sport.

[dr-baker]

Don't mess sports with politics >:(

We shouldnt but politicians often get involved with sport.

Ahh, you mean like Carlos Reutemann!

[Captain Hammer]

Once you start making "ethical" or "moral" decisions about the sport, it's a slippery slope and very easy to get caught up in a hypocritical loop.

For example, you could easily make the case that Russia should lose their race because of their actions in Ukraine, and it could be a very strong case.

But what about Australia? Our border protection policies are extremely questionable, with mandatory offshore detention, forced turn-arounds, extremely tight visa regulations, and resettlement in seriously under-developed countries like Cambodia. All of it is run by the navy so that the government can call it a national security issue and avoid any questions about the policies. Just about every interest group has criticised and condemned it, and we're almost certainly heading towards a Royal Commission into it.

So if Russia doesn't deserve a race because of their actions in Ukraine, Australia doesn't deserve it, either. Why then, would Russia lose theirs, while Australia keeps the Grand Prix?

[DanielPT]

Once you start making "ethical" or "moral" decisions about the sport, it's a slippery slope and very easy to get caught up in a hypocritical loop.

For example, you could easily make the case that Russia should lose their race because of their actions in Ukraine, and it could be a very strong case.

But what about Australia? Our border protection policies are extremely questionable, with mandatory offshore detention, forced turn-arounds, extremely tight visa regulations, and resettlement in seriously under-developed countries like Cambodia. All of it is run by the navy so that the government can call it a national security issue and avoid any questions about the policies. Just about every interest group has criticised and condemned it, and we're almost certainly heading towards a Royal Commission into it.

So if Russia doesn't deserve a race because of their actions in Ukraine, Australia doesn't deserve it, either. Why then, would Russia lose theirs, while Australia keeps the Grand Prix?

Quite simply, because Russia belongs to the 'baddies' group and Australia belongs to the 'good guys'. If, for the west, you belong to the bad guys, there plenty of things you cannot do. The most paradigmatic case was Iraq and Saddam. Where they worse that the Saudis (who still support organizations like Al-Qaeda)? No. Still, as they were in the baddies group, they had to be wiped out. It also shows that the West misses the point on many regional struggles and balances that aren't as clear cut as that. Like Iraq, that Saddam kept intact and is now worse that ever. How many millions have now died thanks to this USA policy? The same for the Ukraine. When the plane was shot down many in the US news blamed Russia. Thanks to this, and with Russia point of view in mind, what was the incentive to allow an 'independent' investigation filled with westerners to have access to the crash site? They were already being hanged regardless. Like I said, keep it simple: good vs bad.

[DemocalypseNow]

But what about Australia? Our border protection policies are extremely questionable, with mandatory offshore detention, forced turn-arounds, extremely tight visa regulations, and resettlement in seriously under-developed countries like Cambodia. All of it is run by the navy so that the government can call it a national security issue and avoid any questions about the policies. Just about every interest group has criticised and condemned it, and we're almost certainly heading towards a Royal Commission into it.

Certainly Bernie doesn't care, seeing as FOM transports everything via plane rather than by boat!

[girry]

A line is hard to draw for who "should" not get to host sporting events, but imo youre gonna be way beyond the line when you walk in and invade another country.

I'd also like to point out that Cptn's posts misrepresentate a lot of things (the support on Yanukovych's "legal" government, the "division" of the country pre-invasion, the comparison between Australia and Russia - lol wat ...) but then again I suppose misrepresentating was his intention too, so well done with it.

Oh well, I suppose it's easier to look at the events from Australia or Portugal and appear as the white knight standing on the fence with an "unbiased" view of the events.

---

Bernie won't care about anything though so the race will go on, but that's obvious.

[DanielPT]

A line is hard to draw for who "should" not get to host sporting events, but imo youre gonna be way beyond the line when you walk in and invade another country.

I'd also like to point out that Cptn's posts misrepresentate a lot of things (the support on Yanukovych's "legal" government, the "division" of the country pre-invasion, the comparison between Australia and Russia - lol wat ...) but then again I suppose misrepresentating was his intention too, so well done with it.

Oh well, I suppose it's easier to look at the events from Australia or Portugal and appear as the white knight standing on the fence with an "unbiased" view of the events.

I'm only speaking for myself here, but I assure you that I was not portraying the white knight standing on the fence. I say that the whole West portrays itself as a white knight standing on the fence. That is the whole objective of their propaganda. And in the case of EU - Ukraine - Russia, there are clearly major political games going on, nevermind geopolitical warfare. And trust me, it is hard to to be unbiased in Western civilization countries.

[Captain Hammer]

I'd also like to point out that Cptn's posts misrepresentate a lot of things (the support on Yanukovych's "legal" government, the "division" of the country pre-invasion, the comparison between Australia and Russia - lol wat ...) but then again I suppose misrepresentating was his intention too, so well done with it.

Would you care to explain how I have misrepresented things rather than simply saying that I have and leave it at that?

As for my comparison betwewn Australia and Russia, I thought my point was quite clear - if you start considering "ethical governance" as the leading factor as to whether or not a country hosts a race, it's easy to wind up a hypocrite. You don't have to look too hard to find something questionable being done by a government. In our case, the Australian government enforces border protection policies that are inhumane, hidden behind "national security" to avoid scrutiny, and motivated by purely selfish political reasons. If you decided who had the right to host a Grand Prix based on "ethical governance", Australia would lose their race for sure. But if Russia lost their race when Australia kept theirs, you'd be a hypocrite.

[RonDenisDeletraz]

I'd also like to point out that Cptn's posts misrepresentate a lot of things (the support on Yanukovych's "legal" government, the "division" of the country pre-invasion, the comparison between Australia and Russia - lol wat ...) but then again I suppose misrepresentating was his intention too, so well done with it.

Would you care to explain how I have misrepresented things rather than simply saying that I have and leave it at that?

As for my comparison betwewn Australia and Russia, I thought my point was quite clear - if you start considering "ethical governance" as the leading factor as to whether or not a country hosts a race, it's easy to wind up a hypocrite. You don't have to look too hard to find something questionable being done by a government. In our case, the Australian government enforces border protection policies that are inhumane, hidden behind "national security" to avoid scrutiny, and motivated by purely selfish political reasons. If you decided who had the right to host a Grand Prix based on "ethical governance", Australia would lose their race for sure. But if Russia lost their race when Australia kept theirs, you'd be a hypocrite.

If we took away the F1 race from every country with a sketchy human rights record, there would be no more F1

[Captain Hammer]

And that's my point. It's not Formula 1's place to make these sweeping "moral" pronouncements, especially when there are other races that the sport happily supports despite questionable practices in those countries.

[CoopsII]

Id like to ask Solarcold, if he/she is still knocking about, what's the view in his/her area of Russia about the forthcoming race?

[watka]

Id like to ask Solarcold, if he/she is still knocking about, what's the view in his/her area of Russia about the forthcoming race?

Perhaps if you looked further up the page, your wish will be granted.

[solarcold]

Id like to ask Solarcold, if he/she is still knocking about, what's the view in his/her area of Russia about the forthcoming race?

Hey, I'm he and I'm here nearly on a daily basis, although I'm a rare poster.
Russians have a generally positive view on the forthcoming race. Russian F1 fans are just purely happy about it. People who are not familiar with F1 - well they just don't care. It was worse with Olympic Games: people were unhappy with how expencive they were (and probably had their point).

[CoopsII]

Id like to ask Solarcold, if he/she is still knocking about, what's the view in his/her area of Russia about the forthcoming race?

Hey, I'm he and I'm here nearly on a daily basis, although I'm a rare poster.
Russians have a generally positive view on the forthcoming race. Russian F1 fans are just purely happy about it. People who are not familiar with F1 - well they just don't care. It was worse with Olympic Games: people were unhappy with how expencive they were (and probably had their point).

Thanks for the reply and I was just playing it safe with the whole he/she thing, you never know on the internet!

If nothing else sport does indeed bring people together, even when the powers that be would prefer us to not to get along with each other.

[girry]

I'd also like to point out that Cptn's posts misrepresentate a lot of things (the support on Yanukovych's "legal" government, the "division" of the country pre-invasion, the comparison between Australia and Russia - lol wat ...) but then again I suppose misrepresentating was his intention too, so well done with it.

Would you care to explain how I have misrepresented things rather than simply saying that I have and leave it at that?

As for my comparison betwewn Australia and Russia, I thought my point was quite clear - if you start considering "ethical governance" as the leading factor as to whether or not a country hosts a race, it's easy to wind up a hypocrite. You don't have to look too hard to find something questionable being done by a government. In our case, the Australian government enforces border protection policies that are inhumane, hidden behind "national security" to avoid scrutiny, and motivated by purely selfish political reasons. If you decided who had the right to host a Grand Prix based on "ethical governance", Australia would lose their race for sure. But if Russia lost their race when Australia kept theirs, you'd be a hypocrite.

Ukraine was an unified country before the maidan, sure people had different opinions about matters such as EU but that's extremely typical for any given country. Ukraine was relatively stable for a country that had undergone a revolution even after the maidan. At that Yanukovych was gone, only a small minority of Ukrainians was protesting against the new government, and while they may have experienced slight language discrimination and such in the wake of the maidan, they most definitely were not under a massive threat by a "fascist" government. At that point, Russia supported Yanukovych and went on conquer Crimea to protect the population from the fascist government.

Calling those moves anything but powerplay by the Russians is bs. "support stability"....lol.

As for the "ethican governance" stuff, every single country violates human rights. I'm not familiar with the situation in Oz but all reports suggest to me that it's still a top 20 country in regards to them, and they do not kill a journalist a month, so it was odd to take Australia up. I'd have thought China or Bahrain would have been more fit comparison points for Russia.

Furthermore, Russia not having an "ethical enough a governance" was not the reason I wouldn't let the Russians host a race; and that's exactly for the reasons you mentioned - it'd be far too difficult to draw a line.

The reason is a militant invasion to another country coupled with aggressive war-mongering rhethorics and acts towards independent countries.

[CoopsII]

The reason is a militant invasion to another country coupled with aggressive war-mongering rhethorics and acts towards independent countries.

I don't disagree but that puts all the British GPs from 2003 onwards on dodgy ground.