By I Hunt, Esq.
Molot is synonymous with quality and reliability. Preserving the history and enhancing the functionality of the Kalashnikov rifle is the legacy of Molot. Unfortunately, Molot became a victim of politics and the agenda of those seeking to curtail American’s 2nd Amendment Rights. The initial shot fired in the war on Russian-made firearms in the United States was taken on March 16, 2014 by President Barack Obama who issued Executive Order 13661 declaring Russia’s conduct in the Ukraine a “a “threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.” This Executive Order served as the springboard for economic sanctions against several Russian firearms manufacturers including Kalashnikov Concern (the company that originally brought you the Izhmash and Saiga rifles and shotguns). Unfortunately, the Executive Ordered decreed by President Obama which was used to limit the importation of Russian-made firearms into the United States did not end with his presidency. Rather, three years later President Donald Trump follows the lead of his predecessor and joins to the Obama legacy by adding Molot onto the list of sanctioned Russian firearms companies. Ironically, it was not the democrats who ended the Russian legacy and the importation of quality Russian-made firearms into the United States. It was done by a President elected on the back of the firearms community. Simply put, Molot was killed by one person who affirmed that our “Second Amendment rights are under siege” and affirmed that “they will never ever be under siege as long as I am your president.”
What was the basis for President Trump targeting Molot and the last true Russian-made firearms being imported into the United States? This is all we got:
Molot-Oruzhie, OOO manufactures ordnance and accessories and is located in the Russian Federation. In 2016, previously-designated Kalashnikov Concern advised a foreign company to use Molot-Oruzhie, OOO to falsify invoices in order to circumvent U.S. and EU sanctions. Molot-Oruzhie is being designated for operating in the arms or related material sector of the Russian Federation and for acting or purporting to act for on behalf of, directly or indirectly, Kalashnikov Concern.
So, it appears that Kalashnikov Concern (a competitor of Molot) advised an unidentified and unknown foreign company to use Molot to falsify invoices to circumvent the sanctions. It does not state Molot actually falsified invoices for Kalashnikov Concern nor does it state Molot ever actually circumvented the sanctions. Rather, the entire basis for President Trump adding Molot to the list of sanctioned entities years after President Obama issued his Executive Order is because its competitor allegedly told a foreign company to inquire whether Molot would falsify invoices. If this does not make any sense to you, you are not alone. Either way, a legacy has died from friendly fire.