That’s a lot of money, but also only 2%° of the total. I wonder how much damage you could do to the mission of the agency by trying to prevent these sorts of leaks in the future. It might be better to accept a bit of loss and litigate after the fact than to introduce more precautionary procedure into things.
° exactly 2%, actually, which makes me think one of the numbers in here have been found by dividing or multplying by 50.
This is just called good government relations. You don’t want acting heads of state to be mad at you. Google does this for everything. Borders and names on their maps change depending on who’s asking. Maybe it shouldn’t be like that, and maybe it’s disappointing that the US apparently requires coddling like this, but it is what it is.
I find the article’s premise that optimizing individual returns will wreck the banking system very dubious. In all other parts of the financial system (risk-adjusted) greed is good, but when retail customers do it then it’s bad?
If you try to make a new agreement with all the member states I think you’ll find it extremely difficult. The EU just has to be messy because of its members.
Did Russian money fund this article?