> Why would any reasonable project try to circumvent such sanctions
Well, first they should be convinced that the sanction makes sense. It does not matter if it is the "law", an "order" or anything similar: you are responsible of what you do - including what you comply to.
Maybe it does make sense, maybe it does not: from the outside, with limited information about the original decree, it seems perplexing. Surely it raises questions.
For what your post is concerned, the war and the contributions to the Kernel do not have solid links between them - the jump from "there is a war" and "some contractors are inhibited contribution to the Linux kernel" is all to be justified. (The law is not a justification: the law requires justification.)
Well, first they should be convinced that the sanction makes sense. It does not matter if it is the "law", an "order" or anything similar: you are responsible of what you do - including what you comply to.
Maybe it does make sense, maybe it does not: from the outside, with limited information about the original decree, it seems perplexing. Surely it raises questions.
For what your post is concerned, the war and the contributions to the Kernel do not have solid links between them - the jump from "there is a war" and "some contractors are inhibited contribution to the Linux kernel" is all to be justified. (The law is not a justification: the law requires justification.)