As Western nations have sought to cripple Russia’s economy and weaken its capacity to wage war, the Ukraine war has placed economic sanctions at the forefront of international diplomacy. From cutting off access to international financial systems to banning exports of critical technologies, these measures represent one of the most coordinated and far-reaching sanctions regimes in modern history. Yet, as the war grinds on, the question of their effectiveness grows more pressing: do sanctions still work as intended, or have they become blunt instruments in a rapidly changing world?

Sanctions have been a key part of the geopolitical toolbox for decades, seen as a way to exert pressure without resorting to military force. However, their success in achieving long-term political goals remains deeply contested. In the case of Russia, despite the severe economic strain imposed, sanctions have not yet led to any major shifts in its military strategy or political stance. Moreover, the unintended global economic consequences—ranging from energy shortages in Europe to inflationary pressures worldwide—have made the cost of sanctions a subject of intense debate.

This article will examine whether sanctions, particularly in the context of the Ukraine war, still function as an effective means of conflict resolution. By analysing the impact these measures have had on Russia and the broader international community, this article will assess their continued relevance in managing geopolitical crises. Are sanctions a powerful tool for enforcing international norms, or do they merely serve as political posturing, failing to bring about meaningful change?

Sanctions in the Ukraine War: A Case Study

The 2022 invasion of Ukraine triggered one of the most extensive and coordinated sanction regimes in modern history, spearheaded by Western powers. The aim was clear: to isolate Russia economically, politically, and militarily in a bid to cripple its war efforts. This sanctions strategy targeted a wide array of sectors, ranging from finance and energy to high technology and consumer goods, severely constraining Russia’s global interactions.

Sanctions Timeline and Economic Impact

In the immediate aftermath of the invasion, Western countries, particularly the U.S. and the EU, swiftly enacted sweeping sanctions across key sectors of Russia’s economy. Below is a timeline outlining these major sanctions:

• 28th February, 2022: The EU and U.S. freeze approximately $300 billion in Russian central bank reserves, limiting Moscow’s ability to access its foreign assets.
• 2nd March, 2022: Major Russian financial institutions, including Sberbank and VTB, are cut off from the SWIFT payment system, isolating Russia from global financial markets and complicating international transactions.
• March 2022: Technology sanctions take effect, particularly targeting the aerospace and electronics sectors. These restrictions disrupt the supply of key components necessary for both civilian and military high-tech industries.
• 3rd June, 2022: The EU imposes a partial embargo on Russian oil imports as part of its sixth sanctions package, marking a significant blow to one of Russia’s main revenue sources.
• 5th December, 2022: A price cap on Russian oil exports is introduced by the G7 and the EU, further restricting Moscow’s ability to generate income from energy sales.

Initially, the sanctions appeared to severely damage the Russian economy. However, Russia’s economic decline stabilised faster than expected. By 2023, inflation fell to below 5%, and the ruble regained much of its value, thanks to stringent capital controls and active interventions by the Russian central bank.

One crucial factor in this resilience was Moscow’s ability to reroute energy exports to non-Western markets. China and India became key buyers of Russian oil, albeit at discounted prices. While these new relationships provided economic relief, Russia’s reliance on non-Western buyers left it vulnerable to fluctuating demand and complex geopolitical dynamics.

Military and Political Consequences

Sanctions were designed not only to disrupt Russia’s economy but also to weaken its military capabilities. Key sanctions on dual-use technologies aimed to undermine Russia’s defence sector, preventing the development of advanced weaponry.

Politically, the sanctions have had paradoxical effects. While they increased the pressure on the Russian economy and elite, they have also reinforced domestic political cohesion around the  Kremlin. President Vladimir Putin has framed the sanctions as evidence of a Western conspiracy to undermine Russian sovereignty, strengthening nationalist support. This narrative has helped insulate his regime from internal dissent, despite growing discontent in urban areas and among Russia’s business elite, who have been heavily affected by the economic fallout.

Adaptation and Strategic Shifts

Russia’s ability to adapt has been largely driven by new economic partnerships and internal adjustments. The Kremlin increased financial support to critical industries such as defence, agriculture, and technology, using its sovereign wealth funds to buffer key sectors. Additionally, Russia’s trade ties with China, India, and Turkey have deepened significantly, offsetting some of the losses incurred from its exclusion from Western markets. These relationships, while economically vital, often put Russia in a weaker negotiating position, especially with China, which has used Russia’s isolation to secure  favourable trade deals.

Effectiveness of Sanctions: Successes and Shortcomings

Sanctions, as a tool of foreign policy, are meant to impose economic and political pressure without direct military intervention. In the case of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the overarching goal was clear: to force Russia to cease hostilities, or at the very least, to weaken its ability to sustain a prolonged conflict. However, the effectiveness of these sanctions is mixed, and a thorough examination reveals both successes and significant shortcomings.

Successes: Economic Pressure on Russia

The primary goal of the sanctions was to weaken Russia’s economy, diminishing its war capacity. In this regard, the sanctions have indeed had some success. The financial measures, particularly the freezing of central bank reserves and cutting Russian banks from the SWIFT system, dealt an immediate blow to Russia’s access to international markets. The ruble initially plummeted, and inflation surged, reaching 17.8% in April 2022. This period of financial instability triggered a recession, with Russia’s GDP shrinking by 2.1% in 2022.

Furthermore, the sanctions on Russia’s energy exports—specifically the EU’s phased ban on Russian oil and the imposition of price caps—cut deeply into the country’s revenue streams. Energy sales, particularly oil and gas, form the backbone of Russia’s economy, accounting for 45% of its federal budget. By mid-2023, these sanctions had resulted in a significant reduction in Russia’s foreign currency reserves, forcing the country to sell its energy at discounts, primarily to China and India. According to data from the International Energy Agency, Russian oil exports dropped by 500,000 barrels per day in early 2023 compared to pre-war levels.

The technological sanctions, particularly those targeting semiconductors and aerospace components, also hit Russia hard. These restrictions affected the defence industry’s ability to manufacture sophisticated weapons systems. For instance, production of high-precision missiles, which require advanced electronics, has been significantly delayed, undermining Russia’s ability to maintain its pre-war military superiority.

Shortcomings: Russia’s Adaptation and Economic Resilience

Despite these successes, Russia has demonstrated remarkable resilience, adapting to the sanctions in ways that have blunted their intended effects. Central to this resilience has been Moscow’s pivot towards non-Western markets. Energy sanctions, while severe, have not entirely crippled Russia’s oil revenues. By cultivating new trade relationships with China, India, and Turkey, Russia has been able to reroute a significant portion of its energy exports.In fact, trade between Russia and China increased by over 30% in 2023, with China buying discounted Russian oil. India, too, emerged as a major buyer, taking advantage of the lower prices to increase its imports of Russian crude oil.

Another key factor in Russia’s economic survival has been its strict capital controls and fiscal interventions. The Russian central bank enacted aggressive measures to stabilise the ruble, including hiking interest rates and limiting capital outflows. By mid-2023, inflation had decreased to below 5%. and the ruble had regained much of its value. This recovery, although fragile, underscores the limitations of sanctions as an all-encompassing economic weapon.

In addition to energy trade, Russia has sought to replace sanctioned goods with domestic production or imports from nations outside the Western sphere of influence. Military components, for example, have been sourced through black-market channels or from countries such as Iran and North Korea, though these substitutes are often of inferior quality. This ability to circumvent sanctions highlights how global trade networks provide workarounds for even the most targeted measures.

Unintended Consequences: The Impact on Europe and Global Markets

The sanctions against Russia, while aimed at crippling its economy, have had significant unintended consequences, particularly for Europe and the global economy. Perhaps the most severe has been the energy crisis in Europe. The EU’s reliance on Russian gas, which accounted for 40% of its supply before the war, left it vulnerable when Russia retaliated by cutting off gas exports. This led to soaring energy prices across the continent, with natural gas prices hitting record highs in late-2022. straining households and industries alike. Eurozone inflation surged to 10.6% in October 2022, driven largely by rising energy costs.

In response, European countries were forced to diversify their energy sources rapidly, importing liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the U.S. and other countries. While this mitigated some of the immediate shortfalls, it came at a cost. The price of LNG is typically higher than pipeline gas, and Europe’s increased demand for alternative energy sources led to higher global prices, which in turn exacerbated inflationary pressures globally. Countries in the Global South, already facing economic difficulties from the COVID-19 pandemic, were particularly hard-hit by rising food and energy costs.

Moreover, the disruption of global trade flows caused by the sanctions had ripple effects on supply chains, particularly in commodities like fertilisers, metals, and grains, where Russia and Ukraine are major global suppliers. Russia is a key exporter of potash and other fertilisers, and its exclusion from global markets caused prices to spike, creating food security concerns in many developing nations. The grain deal brokered between Russia and Ukraine, with the mediation of Turkey and the UN, offered some relief, but the instability in global food markets remains a concern.

Conclusion

The Ukraine war underscores both the strengths and weaknesses of sanctions as a geopolitical tool. While they successfully degraded Russia’s economic and military capacities, they fell short of achieving their ultimate goal: altering Moscow’s strategic decisions. The unintended consequences—such as energy shortages in Europe and the reshaping of global trade—show that sanctions can have a far-reaching, unpredictable impact.

Sanctions remain a powerful but imperfect tool in today’s geopolitical landscape. Their viability in future conflicts will require more precise targeting, stronger enforcement to close loopholes, and greater collaboration among global powers. Moving forward, sanctions must adapt to an increasingly interconnected world, with a sharper focus on minimising collateral damage while maximising pressure on targeted regimes.