Sanctions against Russia: Selective pressure
Agia Zahrebelska, Ukrainian lawyer, State Commissioner of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine (2015–2019).
The time for saying, “Sanctions should stay in place until the last Russian soldier leaves Ukrainian soil,” is over. Below, I’ll simply explain what the reality should be
But in reality, it’s unfortunately different — just like the entire negotiation process, which is, in part, a consequence of our actions and decisions over at least the past three years.
Sanctions against Russia can be roughly divided into five groups:
1. Sanctions as a tool to pressure Russia into changing its behavior — ending aggression.
These sanctions can be lifted if aggression stops, meaning they have served their purpose.
But it’s too early to talk about lifting them before the aggression ends.
2. Sanctions as a deterrent against future aggression.
The toughest question: When can we be sure Russia won’t attack again?
To avoid long debates, here’s a simple formula that was discussed even before the full-scale invasion: “Justice – Repentance – (and only then) Mercy.”
3. Sanctions as part of the policy of non-recognition of occupied territories and a tool to pressure for their liberation.
These sanctions should remain until the occupied territories are fully liberated.
4. Frozen assets under sanctions to ensure compensation for damages.
These should only be released after full compensation is made.
5. Sanctions in response to hybrid aggression (cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, etc.).
These are tied to the cessation of hybrid attacks and certainty that they won’t be repeated.
Determining which sanctions fall into which category and how to measure their effectiveness should be a topic of discussion — both internally and with partners — to develop a common approach. However, this should not take place in a world where the aggressor is brought to the negotiating table through force, not through incentives.
https://global.espreso.tv/sanctions-against-russia-selective-pressure
