On Tuesday, the United States banned imports of Russian oil, closing one of the few remaining loopholes in its economic blockade of a country that exports a large share of the world’s energy, wheat, and metals.
On Friday, the U.S. signaled that it would join the E.U. and other members of the G7 in suspending normal trade relations with Russia altogether.
The impact of these unprecedented sanctions will be felt far beyond Russia’s borders.
The removal of large quantities of Russian energy and agricultural products from the global market is already putting upward pressure on global food prices, which hit a record high last month. Even before the present crisis, millions in Afghanistan were at risk of famine.
Now, deaths from starvation are poised to spike, while more mundane material hardships ripple out across the Global North. And the economic outlook is liable to get worse before it gets better, as the Kremlin is signaling that it will soon unveil retaliatory sanctions.
Thus, the conflict’s current trajectory is leading the world toward the “lose-lose” scenario of a global recession, while also increasing the tail risk of nuclear war. It is not clear how either side intends to avert disaster, let alone secure a victory.
Over the past two weeks, the U.S. and Europe have rapidly escalated their economic war on Russia, crossing lines that were unthinkable in the conflict’s early days. The strategic logic behind these moves — which is to say, the theory for how immiserating Russia will preserve an independent Ukraine — remains largely unspecified. And there is reason to fear that the West’s escalations reflect domestic political pressures more than cool-headed diplomatic calculation. For a White House that is eager to demonstrate American leadership on the global stage, but loath to entangle U.S. troops in another far-flung conflict, ever-more punishing sanctions may have simply been the path of least resistance, no matter where it appeared to lead.
Other traditional aims of economic warfare are to coerce an aggressor into a peace settlement, or to undermine their material capacity for waging war. Unfortunately, there is cause for doubting the sanctions’ efficacy on both these fronts.
On Friday, the U.S. signaled that it would join the E.U. and other members of the G7 in suspending normal trade relations with Russia altogether.
The impact of these unprecedented sanctions will be felt far beyond Russia’s borders.
The removal of large quantities of Russian energy and agricultural products from the global market is already putting upward pressure on global food prices, which hit a record high last month. Even before the present crisis, millions in Afghanistan were at risk of famine.
Now, deaths from starvation are poised to spike, while more mundane material hardships ripple out across the Global North. And the economic outlook is liable to get worse before it gets better, as the Kremlin is signaling that it will soon unveil retaliatory sanctions.
Thus, the conflict’s current trajectory is leading the world toward the “lose-lose” scenario of a global recession, while also increasing the tail risk of nuclear war. It is not clear how either side intends to avert disaster, let alone secure a victory.
Over the past two weeks, the U.S. and Europe have rapidly escalated their economic war on Russia, crossing lines that were unthinkable in the conflict’s early days. The strategic logic behind these moves — which is to say, the theory for how immiserating Russia will preserve an independent Ukraine — remains largely unspecified. And there is reason to fear that the West’s escalations reflect domestic political pressures more than cool-headed diplomatic calculation. For a White House that is eager to demonstrate American leadership on the global stage, but loath to entangle U.S. troops in another far-flung conflict, ever-more punishing sanctions may have simply been the path of least resistance, no matter where it appeared to lead.
Other traditional aims of economic warfare are to coerce an aggressor into a peace settlement, or to undermine their material capacity for waging war. Unfortunately, there is cause for doubting the sanctions’ efficacy on both these fronts.
