http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/15/world/with-ukraine-tensions-mounting-us-weighs-new-sanctions-against-russia.html?_r=0The sides were debating how far and how fast to apply additional sanctions. The Obama administration was trying to decide whether to impose them before a meeting scheduled for Thursday in Geneva that is to bring together Secretary of State John Kerry with counterparts from Russia, Ukraine and Europe.
Some officials argued in favor of holding off sanctions, reasoning that it would sour the Geneva meeting and make it harder to forge a diplomatic solution. Others countered that taking action before the meeting would strengthen the hand of the West and signal that continued provocation would not be accepted. Mr. Obama called President François Hollande of France on Monday to coordinate positions.
“There will be further costs imposed on Russia,” Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, told reporters before the president’s call with Mr. Putin. “And certainly if they go further down the road of attempting to destabilize Ukraine rather than choosing the path of de-escalation, the costs will continue to grow.”
Targeting Mr. Sechin would aim directly at Mr. Putin’s inner circle. Rosneft, Mr. Sechin’s oil company, is deeply involved with Western firms. BP owns nearly 20 percent of the company, and ExxonMobil has multiple projects with Rosneft in Siberia, the Arctic, the Black Sea, Canada, Alaska and Texas.
Lawyers at ExxonMobil are researching the impact of sanctions against Mr. Sechin. Given that they would apply to Mr. Sechin personally and not his company, some specialists said it might mean little more than a logistical hassle because he could not travel to the United States to meet with his ExxonMobil partners.
But Anders Aslund, a Russia specialist at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said it would have more of an effect. “If Sechin is banned, it would be very difficult for these companies,” he said. “You don’t want to be connected with a person who’s banned by the United States if you’re a highly U.S.-dependent company.”
Mr. Brennan’s decision to travel to Kiev, however, struck many in Washington as baffling. Russian television first reported over the weekend that the C.I.A. director had arrived in Kiev under an assumed name to direct operations there. The White House and the C.I.A. initially refused to comment but on Monday confirmed his trip. Mr. Carney said it was meant simply to foster “mutually beneficial security cooperation,” and he called Russia’s characterization “absurd.”
Some former intelligence officers privately criticized the visit, saying it only bolstered the conspiracies advanced by Russian officials that the C.I.A. was behind the Ukrainian unrest that toppled a pro-Moscow president in favor of a government oriented toward the West.
But other C.I.A. veterans said there must have been a good reason for him to go because the White House would have known Mr. Brennan would be spotted. “It’s a well-thought-out decision that had to be weighed against playing right into Putin’s message,” said Milton Bearden, chief of the C.I.A.’s Soviet division during the Soviet Union’s collapse.
The Obama administration was also debating what to do about Russian plans to upgrade digital photographic equipment, radars and infrared sensors carried on two observation planes that typically conduct missions over Ukraine. Under the 1993 Open Skies agreement, nations may carry out unarmed aerial observation missions over each other’s territory to promote openness and dispel fears of attack.
But according to a recent letter by four members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, concerns have been raised about Russia’s missions over Ukraine. Before Russia can carry out observation missions with the improved monitoring, the United States and other signatories of the Open Skies agreement must certify that they may be used. The issue is to be discussed at a meeting of administration officials.
“The invasion of Crimea and Moscow’s ongoing efforts to destabilize Ukraine using subversive methods is sufficient reason to counsel further review,” wrote the senators, Mark Warner of Virginia and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, both Democrats, and the Republicans Dan Coats of Indiana and Jim Risch of Idaho.
In a separate letter to Mr. Obama, Mike Rogers of Michigan, the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, urged Mr. Obama to reject the Russian move. “Putin’s attempt to upgrade Russia’s sensing capabilities now is particularly problematic,” he wrote.
