“The 360” shows you diverse perspectives on the day’s top stories and debates.
What’s happening
In response to the invasion of Ukraine, nations around the world have imposed severe sanctions on the Russian economy.
Russia’s largest banks have been cut off from the global financial system. Hundreds of billions in Russian international reserves have been frozen. A number of countries have banned Russia’s planes from entering their airspace. Dozens of high-ranking Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin and several oligarchs in his inner circle, have been targeted with strict individual restrictions. On Tuesday, the U.S. announced it would stop importing oil from Russia. The U.K. also unveiled a plan to phase out Russian oil and gas by the end of the year.
On top of formal sanctions issued by governments, some of the world’s biggest businesses — including in the oil, financial, tech and retail sectors — have either rolled back or entirely suspended operations in Russia.
These moves have dealt a massive blow to the Russian economy, prompting long lines at ATMs amid fears that access to money may become restricted. The country’s currency, the ruble, has lost nearly half of its value in just two weeks. The Russian stock market has been closed to prevent its further collapse.
Putin has likened the sanctions to an “act of war.”
Why there’s debate
There’s substantial disagreement among experts on how much the sanctions will affect Putin’s commitment to a war in which the NATO alliance has vowed to not directly confront the Russian military.
Optimists are hopeful that the sanctions will cut into the Russian economy so deeply that Putin will have no choice but to end his assault on Ukraine. They argue that even an iron-fisted ruler like Putin will have a difficult time retaining power while overseeing a dire recession with no relief in sight. Others add that the people with the greatest ability to influence Putin’s actions, the oligarchs, are also the ones who have been most affected by the sanctions.
Skeptics say sanctions rarely work and often backfire. They argue that, for all the suffering economic retaliation causes among a country’s citizens, sanctions often allow authoritarian leaders to tighten their grip. Others say that Putin is so committed to conquering Ukraine that no amount of economic damage will deter him from his goal. And then there’s the fact that sanctions also damage the issuing countries’ economies — for example, with increasing fuel costs — which could create political pressure that makes it hard for Western governments to keep them in place.
What’s next
If Russian bombs continue to rain down on Ukrainian civilians, more and more countries and businesses may wish to disavow the Kremlin and leave Putin commanding a pariah state. One of the biggest sanction questions remaining is whether mainland European countries — which depend far more on Russian fuel imports — are also willing to boycott Moscow’s oil and natural gas.
Perspectives
It may take time, but sanctions will eventually wear Putin down
“Sanctions against Russia will work because there is broad support for them, but it won’t happen overnight. In the meantime, we must continue to support humanitarian efforts for people in Russia and Ukraine, while holding firm on our position that any invasion of Ukraine is illegal under international law, and until Putin retracts his position, sanctions must not be removed.” — Carli Pierson, USA Today
Anyone thinking sanctions can sway Putin is kidding themselves
“If the goal of sanctions was to prevent war and suffering, they have failed. Granted, the Russian economy has been punished, but the idea underpinning the West’s strategy of instituting massive economic sanctions was based on two premises that have turned out to be false: 1) That Putin cares about the well-being of his people (he doesn’t). 2) That the Russian people (or the oligarchs around him) will rise up against Putin if their well-being suffers significantly.” — Mychailo Wynnyckyj, National Post
These sanctions are more comprehensive than strategies that have failed in the past
“Historically, economic sanctions have tended to be porous: Countries find workarounds, greatly reducing their effectiveness. But a funny thing has happened in this case. So far, economic pressure against Russia appears to be highly effective, crimping Russian trade even in goods that haven’t officially been placed under sanctions.” — Paul Krugman, New York Times
Ordinary Russians will suffer over sanctions that will have little real impact
“Although western sanctions are unlikely to force Putin to abort his invasion of Ukraine, Russian citizens will certainly be hurt. The damage to civilians, particularly the poor populations of sanctioned countries, are too often ignored.” — Sylvanus Kwaku Afesorgbor and Peter A.G. van Bergeijk, The Conversation
Sanctions will only increase Putin’s control over his people
“The issue is that sanctions often prompt a country’s population to rally around the flag. … Put another way, a siege mentality takes over with people banding together to weather the economic storm.” — Simon Constable, Time
Russia’s economic collapse poses a real threat to Putin’s power
“In a year or two, the question won’t be whether Ukraine can survive, it will be whether the Russian Federation can survive. Some 140 million people over 11 time zones may not hold together and remain loyal to a Moscow that squanders vast wealth and blood on a pointless project.” — Holman W. Jenkins, Jr., Wall Street Journal
Sanctions will fail unless Russia’s fossil fuels are directly targeted
“Energy exports are the whole game. … I don’t think Russia is blind to what is going on and it must indicate to them that the West does not really have the stomach for a painful fight over Ukraine.” — Adam Tooze, European politics experts, to Associated Press
Sanctions may not work, but they’re the only option Western countries have
“Sanctions on an epic level are tricky, complicated and can cause collateral damage. But in the face of what is going on in Ukraine, they are the world’s best option.” — Editorial, Chicago Tribune
Even if they don’t end the war, sanctions can have an important impact
“[Sanctions] probably won’t be enough to reverse the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but may very well deter future actions — by Russia or other large nuclear powered states resentful about the de facto independence of territories they think belong to them.” — Shany Mor, Newsweek
There must be a clear goal for what sanctions are intended to accomplish
“Now is the time to begin discussing what the desired end-state is when it comes to Ukraine. Do we want a purely status quo ante? Or something more? What is the art of the possible between Kyiv and Moscow, and the international community? The application of punitive measures without a clear plan for de-escalation and resolution is just inviting greater resistance from Russia.” — Joshua C. Huminski, The Hill
Sanctions will fail as long as Russia’s most important allies stay out of the fray
“Economic sanctions have rarely forced a country to reverse its path, let alone caused regime change. In the few cases where they do appear to have had some effect — South Africa with apartheid, Iran with its nuclear enrichment — sanctions were usually widely enforced and comprehensive. Because key countries including China, India and the Gulf states are unlikely to boycott Russia, sanctions will lack that long-term bite.” — Fareed Zakaria, Washington Post
Russia may be more willing to endure the effects of sanctions that Western nations that imposed them
“Putin, when he took the decision to invade, presumably took the view that ordinary people in the West did not care about Ukraine. He was wrong about that, yet even so there is a risk that ‘Ukraine fatigue’ will set in, especially as the cost of living crisis intensifies.” — Larry Elliott, The Guardian
Is there a topic you’d like to see covered in “The 360”? Send your suggestions to the360@yahoonews.com.
Photo illustration: Yahoo News; photos: Sasha Mordovets/Getty Images, Pierre Crom/Getty Images
