The Biden administration, facing mounting pressure over the death of jailed Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny, rolled out a new package of sanctions against Russia on Friday. However, experts and officials alike paint a nuanced picture of their effectiveness, revealing both limitations and potential for improvement.
In 2021, the US vowed "devastating" consequences if Navalny perished in Russian custody. This week's sanctions, marking the second anniversary of the Ukraine invasion, targeted nearly 600 individuals and entities. These included major financial institutions, government officials, business leaders, and shipping companies, aiming to cripple Russia's war machine and isolate those complicit in human rights abuses.
President Biden, after meeting with Navalny's family, reiterated the US commitment to holding Putin accountable. The administration argues that these measures will progressively strangle the Russian economy, hamper its ability to wage war, and expose human rights violators. They point to targeted sanctions against officials linked to Navalny's prison and promise further action to ensure accountability.
However, this latest move exposes the limitations of US options in response to escalating Russian aggression. Congressional gridlock on additional Ukraine aid, concerns over oil prices in an election year, and the potential for tit-for-tat retaliation from seizing Russian assets leave the White House with limited options. Critics argue that these incremental sanctions create an illusion of action while Ukraine's defenses crumble.
While the administration emphasizes the long-term impact of sanctions, some officials privately downplay their immediate effectiveness, suggesting they primarily target Moscow's ability to bypass existing sanctions. Analysts echo this sentiment, casting doubt on their immediate impact. This frustration reflects similar sentiments following the unprecedented sanctions imposed in 2022, which initially contracted the Russian economy but ultimately saw a slow recovery and signs of long-term resilience.
The US has a long history of levying sanctions against Russia regarding Navalny. Accusing the Kremlin of a 2020 poisoning attempt, the US threatened "devastating consequences" if he died in custody. However, the administration's self-imposed limitations, such as avoiding an oil embargo to prevent energy price hikes, have hampered the effectiveness of these efforts.
Critics like Rep. Andy Barr highlight this "huge sanctions relief" to Russia's war machine through continued oil sales. While the administration maintains that the oil price cap is working, Russian energy revenues remain above pre-war levels, and total government revenue last year reached a record high.
Current and former officials acknowledge that Russian entities have found workarounds to circumvent sanctions. Additionally, while individual sanctions target those with assets abroad, within Russia, they are often seen as badges of honor. Furthermore, while Friday's sanctions target some linked to Navalny's death, many were already identified for months.
The administration's focus has shifted towards tightening the existing sanctions net by identifying networks aiding Russia's evasion and pressuring foreign governments to cooperate. Senator Mark Warner acknowledges the limitations of the current regime, calling for more robust measures.
Proponents of tougher measures advocate for seizing frozen Russian assets. Senator Warner acknowledges legal complexities but sees them as potentially impactful. The administration currently focuses on legal intricacies and potential retaliation from Moscow.
Elaine Dezenski, a former senior official, suggests sanctioning Russia's military trade and lowering the oil price cap further. Additionally, she proposes disrupting the shadow fleet shipping Russian oil outside the cap and transferring Russia's frozen assets to Ukraine to aid their war efforts.
