- Have Russian Sanctions Worked? - 15 January, 2025
With the war in Ukraine almost hitting the two year mark, Russia is now the most sanctioned state, with around 70% of assets in Russian banks being frozen. The US, EU and other Western states and organisations have placed numerous economic sanctions on Russia ever since the annexation of Crimea in 2014 (BBC News, 2024).
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the UK and the US have banned Russian oil and natural gas imports, whilst the EU has banned seaborne crude oil imports. In February of this year, further sanctions were imposed following the imprisonment of opposition leader Alexei Navalny. Alongside national sanctions, many Russian individuals have also been sanctioned, including numerous oligarchs and business people linked to the Kremlin, with their assets frozen and travel bans imposed. Russia’s economy shrank by around 2.1% in the first year of the war (BBC News, 2024).
This essay will focus on the economic sanctions placed against the Russian state, rather than those on specific individuals, and will look at why economic sanctions have become the punishment of choice by the West in this conflict and what that means for the conflict as it progresses.
Economic Sanctions
Economic sanctions have been the action of choice by the West in the past, with the international sanctions against Iraq in 1990 in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait being some of the most notorious, and controversial. What these particular sanctions did was show the ethical concerns – if they work, who do they impact? Several concerns about the humanitarian impact of the sanctions against Iraq resulted in the UN Resolution 706, allowing Iraq to trade its oil for approved goods such as food and medicine. The outcome of the sanctions against Iraq highlighted a key flaw in imposing economic sanctions. The civilians are often the ones that feel the impact of the first, through means such as lack of food, supplies and a quick decline in living standards, posing a human rights question of “Is this ethical?”
Economic sanctions are often considered by governments to be action without ‘action,’ acting decisively without military force.
The Russian Case
One argument is that the economic sanctions against the Russian state were an attempt by the West to show the Russian public the negative consequences of the invasion of Ukraine. But, with the Russian government having a clamp down on media across the country, including cutting off access to Facebook, the BBC and other international news sources. It seems a hard task to change the minds of the Russian public simply by putting the Russian economy under some pressure.
But, like many other cases of economic sanctions being implemented, the main desired outcome of these sanctions against Russia is to put pressure on their economy. However, in an attempt to restrict how much resources the Kremlin can put into the Russian war machine, the West has given the Russian government a way of ‘villanising’ them and victimising themselves, therefore giving further justification behind the need to invade and maintain a presence in Ukraine. Whilst this is not the only justification Russia is giving, it does support the Kremlin’s efforts to portray itself as a defender rather than an aggressor.
To understand the Russian case in point, the relationship it has with the West and the international community as a whole should be understood. The fall of the Soviet Union was viewed by many Russians, including the government, as an embarrassment, and the end of their superpower status. Putin himself has made it clear that he viewed the collapse of the USSR as a tragedy. Nowadays, the Russian relationship with the West is, of course, a complicated one. The West views Russia as ‘aggressive’ and therefore acts defensively to protect its allies, whereas Russia views the West as ‘aggressive’ and therefore acts defensively to protect its interests.
The use of social media by official Russian accounts is a key insight into how the Kremlin wants to shape the current narratives around the war in Ukraine, and Russia’s place in the international community in general. By having a strong presence on social media, whilst simultaneously maintaining strong censorship of international media outlets within Russia, they have managed to form a narrative of the West and Russia that fits their justification of the war. The argument that the West are ‘destabilising’ the region through economic sanctions, as well as providing the Ukrainian army with military equipment, allows the Russian government to justify their actions in Ukraine as being ‘defensive’ rather than attacking. In addition to this, by promoting the West in a negative light, they improve their own image.
Ultimately, the economic sanctions against Russia may have put the country under some economic strain initially. However, in 2023 their economy grew by 2.2% with a predicted growth of 1.1% by the end of 2024, in part caused by their quick thinking by changing their buyers of oil and gas. The narrative the Russian government has created surrounding the sanctions has, quite effectively, allowed them to portray a negative image of those imposing them whilst giving themselves a reason to continue fighting. Whilst this doesn’t necessarily mean all economic sanctions end up in failure and it also should be highlighted that with time Russia may not be able to continue to survive with the amount of sanctions it has against it, it does beg the question of, if the economic sanctions were to have had a more serious impact on the Russian economy, would that be a positive outcome?
Suggested readings:
Masters, Jonathan. What are Economic Sanctions? Council of Foreign Relations. 24 June 2024
Questions:
- Are economic sanctions against states ethical?
- Is the information warfare age a new Cold War?
- How does on-the-ground fighting and information warfare interact with each other?
