Likelihood of reversing Izhmash Ban Executive Order?
- Thread starter Willie D
- Start date
kilimanjaro
New member
Maybe, if Trump rescinds all Obama orders, but reality is US jobs gain with manufacturing here.
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
I'm kind of skeptical that a candidate who wants to keep jobs in the U.S. and is skeptical of our trade agreements is going to open the floodgates on cheap imports to compete with American businesses.
There's a lot of conspiracy theories concerning Trump's relationship with Russia. It will be fascinating to see how it all plays out.
A floodgate of cheap imports? I wish! We're talking Obama's EO, not Bill Clinton's voluntary restraint agreement. Most of Izhmash's previously importable firearms weren't particularly cheap nor even interesting. The Saiga series is where it's at.
Remington sold a lot of their stuff rebadged or under their Spartan line, so there might be less pressure than you'd expect.
A floodgate of cheap imports? I wish! We're talking Obama's EO, not Bill Clinton's voluntary restraint agreement. Most of Izhmash's previously importable firearms weren't particularly cheap nor even interesting. The Saiga series is where it's at.
Remington sold a lot of their stuff rebadged or under their Spartan line, so there might be less pressure than you'd expect.
carguychris
New member
Kozak6 and BR both have excellent points.
If Trump rescinds the EO, the MSM is going to scream foul, and we're going to hear both "Trump is pandering to evil dirty Putin!" AND "Trump is a pants-on-fire hypocrite on trade!" at the same time, likely in the same editorials. (The irony of the political left making latter accusation will be overwhelming, given that we're primarily discussing EBRs, but I predict this won't stop the MSM from running with it.
)
When he was a candidate, Trump seemed to relish this sort of ready-made controversy, even when (perhaps ESPECIALLY when) it was obvious that he was being baited. OTOH his course as president-elect has yet to be conclusively demonstrated.
This one is hard to call, but my hunch is that he will stay out of it. There are plenty of gun-rights initiatives that will yield more measurable benefits in proportion to the controversy they will generate.
If Trump rescinds the EO, the MSM is going to scream foul, and we're going to hear both "Trump is pandering to evil dirty Putin!" AND "Trump is a pants-on-fire hypocrite on trade!" at the same time, likely in the same editorials. (The irony of the political left making latter accusation will be overwhelming, given that we're primarily discussing EBRs, but I predict this won't stop the MSM from running with it.
) When he was a candidate, Trump seemed to relish this sort of ready-made controversy, even when (perhaps ESPECIALLY when) it was obvious that he was being baited. OTOH his course as president-elect has yet to be conclusively demonstrated.
This one is hard to call, but my hunch is that he will stay out of it. There are plenty of gun-rights initiatives that will yield more measurable benefits in proportion to the controversy they will generate.
Last edited:
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
True about political capital from both sides. If you are Putin and Trump is your best buddy ever, you've probably got a long list of controversial policy changes you want to see before spending it on reopening the U.S. to Izhmash exports.
carguychris
New member
Putin has threatened to use the space-travel concessions as a bargaining chip before, along with steering Russian long-haul airliner purchases to Airbus rather than Boeing. The U.S.-Russia relationship is complex.
That said, the Kalashnikov/Izhmash EO represents a pinprick in terms of U.S.-Russian commerce. It's primarily symbolic, which is the main reason I think it's unlikely to be rescinded – there's little practical value in doing so. Trump has bigger fish to fry.
(Just for the record, I'd like to see both this EO and the much broader DoS voluntary restraint agreement overturned; I just don't think either is likely to happen while U.S.-Russian relations are deteriorating.)
That said, the Kalashnikov/Izhmash EO represents a pinprick in terms of U.S.-Russian commerce. It's primarily symbolic, which is the main reason I think it's unlikely to be rescinded – there's little practical value in doing so. Trump has bigger fish to fry.
(Just for the record, I'd like to see both this EO and the much broader DoS voluntary restraint agreement overturned; I just don't think either is likely to happen while U.S.-Russian relations are deteriorating.)
carguychris
New member
^^^ I do a reflexive facepalm whenever anyone in the executive branch begins discussing a "reset button" in the context of international relations.
There is no such "executive order". There are no executive orders pertaining to gun control.
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/obama-subjects.html
carguychris
New member
This link says otherwise. Scroll down to the part where the Kalashnikov Concern aka/fka Izhmash is placed on the Specially Designated Nationals (i.e. banned persons and companies) list.thallub said:
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/Pages/20140716.aspx
I'll cut you some slack.
The EO is hard to find unless you know where to look, because it's written in dense and byzantine trade-sanction language and says nothing explicit about guns, firearms, arms, weapons, etc.[EDIT] Also, an important thing to understand is that it's not a broad ban on Russian firearms; it's a specific set of sanctions against Russian companies under a particular corporate umbrella. It just happens to encompass Saiga rifles and shotguns.
Old Bill Dibble
New member
I'm thinking that this will start to go away in January.
Maybe it will go away, maybe not.
Remember that the Gun Control Act 68 was supported by gun makers, and representatives because a good part of it was a trade protection law.
It's provisions to restrict import guns (especially the cheap competition) were welcomed by US gun makers. And, American worker's facing job loss from cheap(er) foreign products was something politician's still took seriously back then. (they claim they do now, but the way things seem to work out, I have my doubts about how serious some of them really are...)
They supported it, then, because it was good for business. And Trump is all about business.
He'll bend some ways to do business with Russia, and bend other ways to keep the support of American businesses. Where he winds up on any specific matter is, I think, too soon to call.
Remember that the Gun Control Act 68 was supported by gun makers, and representatives because a good part of it was a trade protection law.
It's provisions to restrict import guns (especially the cheap competition) were welcomed by US gun makers. And, American worker's facing job loss from cheap(er) foreign products was something politician's still took seriously back then. (they claim they do now, but the way things seem to work out, I have my doubts about how serious some of them really are...)
They supported it, then, because it was good for business. And Trump is all about business.
He'll bend some ways to do business with Russia, and bend other ways to keep the support of American businesses. Where he winds up on any specific matter is, I think, too soon to call.