Russia IS moving towards WTO membership however, and thus tariffs would be low even IF some kind of free-trade deal was not struck. I referenced NAFTA because goods coming into Alaska could be trucked south through Canada without any taxation due to CANADA'S participation in NAFTA.

A tunnel between Russia and the United States can only yield positive outcomes for both countries.

__________________


"If the founding fathers had all been 'go with the flow' kind of guys we'd all be sitting around sipping tea and listening to Oasis right now." - A friend.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muHg86Mys7I

I just don't see it getting any significant traffic, as there are more efficient all weather methods of transporting products.

How is an undersea tunnel not "all-weather"?

__________________


"If the founding fathers had all been 'go with the flow' kind of guys we'd all be sitting around sipping tea and listening to Oasis right now." - A friend.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muHg86Mys7I

When both ends of it are well above the Arctic Circle, in contrast to southern shipping routes between Russia and the US.

The roads in Alaska are not always navigable, and in some places the road is just a marked stretch of ice. If there's a blizzard, or a Norther or some-such, the roads can be closed for weeks. It's just as bad, sometimes worse in Siberia. Not to mention that there's almost nothing at all in that area of Siberia. The only major Russia city on the Pacific is Vladivostok, and that's almost a thousand miles from the proposed tunnel site. There are no highways up there, no railroads, nothing. Maybe a few minor roads, the equivalent of a US business road (BS-20, etc.), and those would be snow covered and unnavigable for most of the winter.

__________________
An' it harm none, do as ye' will.


Never argue with an idiot. He'll just drag you down to his level of intelligence and beat you with experience.