Sanctions No Longer Enough
Time to stop playing footsie with Russia
The United States last week imposed nearly 400 sanctions and other restrictions on Russian and third-country entities and individuals that support Moscow’s war in Ukraine. As a former Treasury official, I’m a fan of sanctions, but there’s a point where we have to say “enough is enough” and do more.
It’s not that I don’t think sanctions are effective. I’ve written numerous times here showing that they are. If you remember, last year I pointed to the testimony of National Security Council official Daleep Singh to show what the goals of western sanctions against Russia were:
Hit the money. The delivery of a capital account shock unlike any seen in modern economic history.
Hit the war machine. Denial of cutting-edge technology Putin needs to sustain the invasion of Ukraine and the sophistication of his military-industrial base.
Hit Russia’s participation in the international economic order. Degrade Moscow’s borrowing ability, remove Russia’s most-favored nation trading status, and eject Russian banks from the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), among others.
Degrade Russia’s status as a dominant energy supplier over time. Over time is the operative phrase here. The reality of the situation is that despite repeated warnings, Europe was and continues to be heavily reliant upon Russia’s energy exports. This goal was a gradual one that included (finally) sanctioning Nord Stream 2, banning Russian energy imports, releasing oil from domestic strategic reserves and encouraging domestic production, and increasing liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports to Europe, as well as export controls targeting Russia’s oil refining and other measures.
Hit the oligarchs. This one was a long time coming, but we finally began to focus on Russia’s kleptocrats, their ill-gotten gains, their access to the global financial system, and their support for Putin and his aggression.
We’ve done all of the above.
The Yermak-McFaul Expert Group on Russian Sanctions posted on X this morning that three Russian oil refineries—Volgograd, Ilsky, and Yaisky—failed to complete maintenance in October and have extended shutdowns into November. Critical units like catalytic crackers remain offline, affecting oil processing. As a result, idle refining capacity will be up to 2 million tons. Sanctions blocking essential components continue to impact Russia’s oil infrastructure, crippling its ability to maintain operations.
Judging by the hundreds of entities and individuals sanctioned last week, Russia is working overtime to evade sanctions and restrictions. The State Department, in coordination with Treasury and the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) also took hard action against third-country intermediaries who are helping Russia. Moscow continues to rely on complex and expensive transnational schemes to procure critical technological and manufacturing components and machinery it needs to create its own weapons production capability, as well as dual-use technologies to help it conduct its war.
And judging by the constant Russian demands to lift sanctions, Moscow is getting super uncomfortable with being unable to access the global financial system, conduct cross-border transactions, and access critical equipment, technologies, and machinery for its military. In other words, if sanctions were ineffective, Russia wouldn’t constantly be demanding they be lifted.
The problem is that these actions are insufficient in stopping Russia. We are underestimating just how stubborn and determined Russian president Putin is. He’s intent on destroying Ukraine at any cost, and now he’s working hand-in-hand with North Korea, China, and Iran to do so. In addition, individuals and entities in countries such as India, Türkiye, Switzerland, Malaysia, and others have been designated as part of Russia’s schemes, so the Russians are getting a lot of help.
Sanctions are not going to be enough here. After almost three years of war, more action is needed.
The Financial Times is reporting that Ukraine has engaged North Korean troops in Kursk.
Ukraine is now fighting Russia, North Korea, Iran, which is providing weapons and drones to Russia, and other third-countries that are helping Russia conduct its aggression.
The Russians are actively targeting first responders in Ukraine, so medics are now being instructed not to display the red cross on their vehicles, because that makes them an active and immediate target.
Russia has been using chemical weapons in Ukraine, prompting the UK and the United States to take action. Not only did BIS take action in coordination with State and Treasury against third-country facilitators helping Russia’s war, but it also imposed additional restrictions on nine chemical precursors that can be used to produce certain chemical weapons. Although these chemical precursors have mostly commercial uses, Russia has been using them to attack Ukrainians.
BIS reminded us that earlier this year, the State Department issued an assessment that Russia had used Riot Control Agents (RCAs) as a method of warfare against Ukrainian forces in violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). Subsequently, the Department of State issued a determination that Russia had used chloropicrin against Ukrainian troops in violation of the CWC.
The UK also sanctioned Russian entities and individuals for the use of chemical agents in Ukraine.
The Wall Street Journal today reported that Russia is suspected of a plot to send incendiary devices to the United States and Canada.
Western security officials say they believe that two incendiary devices, shipped via DHL, were part of a covert Russian operation that ultimately aimed to start fires aboard cargo or passenger aircraft flying to the U.S. and Canada, as Moscow steps up a sabotage campaign against Washington and its allies.
The devices ignited at DHL logistics hubs in July, one in Leipzig, Germany, and another in Birmingham, England. The explosions set off a multinational race to find the culprits.
In the meantime, we continue tying Ukraine’s hands, not allowing Kyiv to counterattack Russian targets on Russian territory. Some Biden administration officials mumbled something about not imposing new restrictions on Ukrainian use of western weapons if the Ukrainians begin fighting North Korean troops invading their country.
Well, they have. The North Koreans are there. They’re fighting.
National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan as early as 2020 introduced the current administration’s policy toward Russia (link is a video on X): Impose costs on Russia, but don’t let the relationship achieve a “downward spiral.” This is the insane “conflict management” that’s resulting in the murder, torture, rape, deportation, and genocide of the Ukrainian people.
The United States and Western allies are supplying missiles to Ukraine but prohibiting the country from launching them deep into Russia, fearing an “escalation.”
All the while, the Biden Administration is leaking sensitive information like a sieve, further hindering Ukraine’s efforts to defend itself.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy confirmed Wednesday that he asked the United States for Tomahawk long-range missiles to help defeat Russia — and slammed the White House for leaking secrets to the American media.
The Tomahawks can fly up to 1,500 kilometers and would allow Ukraine to strike targets deep inside Russia if permitted by the U.S., which is a key part of Kyiv's so-called Victory Plan for beating back Russian leader Vladimir Putin.
Zelenskyy, though, was displeased with information about the Tomahawk request being divulged to the New York Times for a story in which an anonymous senior U.S. official described the Ukrainian request as totally unfeasible.
Heck, the Biden administration won’t even allow Poland or Romania to shoot down Russian missiles over Ukraine, prompting bipartisan leaders of the US Helsinki Commission to send the White House a letter, calling on the President to allow Poland to intercept Russian missiles over Ukraine, especially those threatening to violate Polish air space, as happened in March.
The former NATO Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, quaked in his boots and croaked something about not wanting to risk NATO becoming part of the conflict.
The current NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte hasn’t addressed the issue yet.
Russia continues to get away with being a gargantuan risk to the global financial system. FATF recently failed once again to blacklist Russia, despite reams of evidence that supported its inclusion on the list of highest-risk countries. As I said in Politico recently, “FATF’s mission is to protect the global financial system. And there is an enormous amount of evidence that Russia is actually undermining those efforts.”
Meanwhile, Ukrainian civilians keep bleeding and dying.
Sanctions are a good tool, but they’re not enough in this case. As the great Juan Zarate—one of the fathers of the US illicit finance regime—recently said:
W/Russia’s deployment of DPRK soldiers vs. Ukraine, it is time to lift any restrictions on Ukraine’s ability to defend itself. All the self-imposed restrictions on delivery/use of weapons have hamstrung Ukraine & given Putin advantage to escalate at will.
The United States in September supposedly was considering lifting restrictions on Ukraine’s ability to defend its country.
“We'll adapt as necessary, including with regard to the means that are at Ukraine's disposal to effectively defend against the Russian aggression," U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said at a news conference in Warsaw. He said the U.S. and its allies “will always” take Ukraine’s battlefield needs into account.
How many innocent Ukrainians have died since VOA published this story in mid-September? How many more must die before the White House unties Ukraine’s hands? How many Ukrainian cities will be destroyed while the United States expresses “grave concern” about troop deployments by the DRPK to the battlefield against Ukraine?
As I previously wrote, I do understand that an immediate invite to Ukraine to join NATO comes with a lot of complications, including the use of the Article 5 Collective Security Guarantee.
But what good is providing weapons systems to Ukraine, if they’re not allowed to target the aggressor?
You and others have been beating that drum for YEARS now... sigh But the administration is afraid to actually take a stand, as we've seen... dammit.