It sounds like you advocate for a strong response. Help me understand the reasoning behind your position on sanctions and the treatment of Kyrgyz citizens.
a bunch of shell companies in luxembourg helping a state level aggressor pursue its financing operations to escape sanctions doesn’t sound like it’s the “regular kyrgyz citizen”
Remittances from Kyrgyz workers in Russia (a lifeline for many families) are now funneled exclusively through state-owned banks like Keremet Bank and Capital Bank to “avoid sanctions risk.” But if these banks lose international access, transfers could face delays, higher fees, or forced use of riskier informal networks.
Kyrgyzstan’s National Bank insists the system remains “stable and adequately capitalized,” but the sanctions could lead to de-risking, where international banks cut ties with Kyrgyz entities altogether, hurting legitimate businesses and trade.
It sounds like you advocate for a strong response. Help me understand the reasoning behind your position on sanctions and the treatment of Kyrgyz citizens.
a bunch of shell companies in luxembourg helping a state level aggressor pursue its financing operations to escape sanctions doesn’t sound like it’s the “regular kyrgyz citizen”
Remittances from Kyrgyz workers in Russia (a lifeline for many families) are now funneled exclusively through state-owned banks like Keremet Bank and Capital Bank to “avoid sanctions risk.” But if these banks lose international access, transfers could face delays, higher fees, or forced use of riskier informal networks.
Kyrgyzstan’s National Bank insists the system remains “stable and adequately capitalized,” but the sanctions could lead to de-risking, where international banks cut ties with Kyrgyz entities altogether, hurting legitimate businesses and trade.
fair enough thank you for your insights