U.S. President Donald Trump’s approach towards peace in Ukraine resembles a ‘good cop’ strategy, attempting to convince Russian President Vladimir Putin to end hostilities in return for being able to keep conquered territories. Trump’s plan would exclude Ukraine from NATO membership. The key question of whether the West would provide military defence support is still open, but at least French President Macron seems convinced Trump will ultimately provide indirect backing to any European peacekeeping force. At the very least, the proposed minerals deal, which grants the U.S. the ability to profit from Ukraine’s riches, provides America with an economic stake in the country, increasing the risk for Putin in case he would dare to attack Ukraine again. This would effectively mean the non-conquered part of Ukraine would become a part of the West.
It is however by no means guaranteed Putin will go along with this. For one, the Kremlin has rejected the proposal of European peacekeeping forces on Ukrainian territory, something Trump had claimed Putin would “have no problem with.” Perhaps some third-country nationals could serve, but ultimately a ‘neutral Ukraine’ sounds like fiction following Putin’s aggression.
If Putin refuses the deal, Trump may well move to the ‘bad cop’ approach. U.S. national security adviser Mike Waltz has proposed warning Russia that the U.S. could substantially increase aid to Ukraine if Putin doesn’t play ball. Waltz has also backed leveraging sanctions and energy policies to undermine Russia’s war machine and close loopholes in Russia’s energy exports.
For now, it is clear that Ukraine has been helped by weapon deliveries. Those have always been limited in order to prevent escalation, so this remains a risk best kept in mind.
Failing sanctions
The sanctions imposed have utterly failed to restrain Russia’s war machine. Proponents maintain that sanctions only need to be implemented more intelligently, but according to Elina Ribakova, an economist with the Peterson Institute in Washington D.C., things haven’t developed “as bad for Russia economically as many in Moscow had feared.” For military supplies, Russia has simply become more dependent on China. “Russia is now China’s vassal,” Ribakova says.
This is no surprise given how, historically, economic sanctions have almost never achieved their aim. The targeted regimes typically manage to use all kinds of innovative techniques to evade sanctions. Russia has also done so. Since 2022, goods exports from Russia to the European Union have fallen significantly, but exports to Turkey and the United Arab Emirates, as well as six states in the Russian neighbourhood, like Kyrgyzstan, have increased more or less correspondingly.
None of that is however stopping the EU from imposing new sanctions on Russia. The 16th sanctions package, which was adopted late last month“targets systemically important sectors of the Russian economy such as energy, trade, transport, infrastructure, and financial services.”
Human rights
Sanctions inflict harm though—and not always on the people they intend to target. Earlier this month, Belgian daily De Tijd revealed that a large part of the €258 billion frozen due to the sanctions against Russia is actually owned by Western banks as well as non-sanctioned people and companies. A lot of the funds are frozen in Belgium, where Euroclear, a key custodian, is based. If people want to have their money or securities released, it is far from easy.
One of the people affected by the sanctions is the sister of Russian-Uzbek billionaire Ališer Usmanov. In an interview with Corriere, she has unwaveringly declared innocence, saying:
I am a doctor, a gynaecologist, and have been retired for five years. I have practised my entire life in Tashkent, the capital of Uzbekistan, where I was born and raised, and where I still live with my family. It makes no sense that I have been subjected to sanctions because of my brother Alisher Usmanov: he didn’t use me to hide his assets.
She thereby stressed that she has voluntarily, permanently, and irrevocably waived her right to obtain any benefits from the trust settled long ago by her brother. That argument has not convinced the European Court of Justice—at least for now.
However, in a different case, in 2024, the ECJ ruled that the European Council had not presented enough evidence to establish that two Russian oligarchs, Petr Aven and Mikhail Fridman, were involved in efforts that “undermine or threaten the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine.” Another notable case involves The EU’s General Court overturning EU sanctions on Russian former Formula 1 driver Nikita Mazepin.In his case, the Court stressed that “the existence of a link going beyond a family relationship” was required in order for someone to be sanctioned. The younger Mazepin, therefore, could not be held accountable for the actions of his father, Dmitry Mazepin, a Kremlin-linked oligarch, who has failed to have the sanctions imposed against him overturned.
In the context of war, it is important for the West to stick to its principles. That includes not targeting people because of their nationality or family ties. There is a danger that this is forgotten, as even the right to legal representation is being restricted. In December, two Belgian lawyer associations legally challenged sanctions “prohibiting lawyers from providing legal advice to legal persons, entities or bodies established in Russia in matters unrelated to litigation.” Giving up our values is of no help to Ukraine.
