Earlier this week, Moscow announced a yearlong embargo on imported food products from countries that have imposed sanctions against Russian companies and people, prompting some Russians to (half)jokingly bid farewell to their favorite treats on social media.
The Russian government published the complete list of goods on its official website on Thursday. The food ban applies to the United States, European Union, Canada, Australia and Norway. Here’s what’s on it:
- Beef (fresh, chilled, or frozen)
- Pork (fresh, chilled, or frozen)
- Poultry (fresh, chilled, or frozen)
- Dried or smoked meat
- All fish
- Crustaceans, a category that includes crab, lobster, and shrimp
- Milk and dairy products
All the banned imports are basic staples, which means that Russia can source them from other friendlier nations (like the former Soviet republics), or boost its own domestic food production. Still, a year is a long time to go without French cheeses or Belgian chocolate, and Russians are heading to grocery stores to stock up on foreign goods they’ve been eating since the collapse of the Soviet Union.
While the ban has the potential to hurt U.S. companies with Russian trade deals, the restrictions will likely hurt Russia too. Russia imports about 25 percent of its food, according to figures reported by The New York Times. Of that, about 75 percent comes from the United States and Europe. Putin seems to finally be listening to the West, people joke, because he is the latest to sanction Russia.
The food ban is being touted as a point of nationalistic pride in Russia: See, we don’t need the West to survive! A similar ban in 2010, of U.S. poultry imports, was given the same message, eschewing the days of the early 1990s when the first Bush administration sent over American chicken to feed a hungry people facing a dire economic situation. Then and now, reliance on Western countries for the basics is something Putin wants to forget.
But judging from this list, foreign booze is fine.
This story has been updated.
What We're Following See More »
Paul Ryan told CNN today he's "not ready" to back Donald Trump at this time. "I'm not there right now," he said. Ryan said Trump needs to unify "all wings of the Republican Party and the conservative movement" and then run a campaign that will allow Americans to "have something that they're proud to support and proud to be a part of. And we've got a ways to go from here to there."
In The New Yorker, Jeffrey Toobin gives Preet Bharara, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, the longread treatment. The scourge of corrupt New York pols, bad actors on Wall Street, and New York gang members, Bharara learned at the foot of Chuck Schumer, the famously limelight-hogging senator whom he served as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee staff. No surprise then, that after President Obama appointed him, Bharara "brought a media-friendly approach to what has historically been a closed and guarded institution. In professional background, Bharara resembles his predecessors; in style, he’s very different. His personality reflects his dual life in New York’s political and legal firmament. A longtime prosecutor, he sometimes acts like a budding pol; his rhetoric leans more toward the wisecrack than toward the jeremiad. He expresses himself in the orderly paragraphs of a former high-school debater, but with deft comic timing and a gift for shtick."
President Obama has announced another round of commutations of prison sentences. Most of the 58 individuals named are incarcerated for possessions with intent to distribute controlled substances. The prisoners will be released between later this year and 2018.
The Daily Beast has unearthed a piece that Donald Trump wrote for Gear magazine in 2000, which anticipates his 2016 sales pitch quite well. "Perhaps it's time for a dealmaker who can get the leaders of Congress to the table, forge consensus, and strike compromise," he writes. Oddly, he opens by defending his reputation as a womanizer: "The hypocrites argue that a man who loves and appreciates beautiful women (and does so legally and openly) shouldn't become a national leader? Is there something wrong with appreciating beautiful women? Don't we want people in public office who show signs of life?"