The ruble is rising and Putin is stronger than ever – our sanctions have failed

By: Simon Jenkins / The Guardian
Translated by: Agron Shala / Telegrafi.com

In recent international history, Western sanctions against Russia are the most ill-conceived and counterproductive policies. Military aid to Ukraine is justified, but economic warfare is ineffective against the regime in Moscow and destructive to ill-considered targets. Global energy prices are rising, inflation is rising, supply chains are chaotic, and millions of people are struggling for gas, grain, and fertilizer. However, Vladimir Putin's barbarism is only escalating – as is his control over his own people.

Criticism of Western sanctions is almost anathema. Defense analysts are mute on the subject. The strategic think tanks are silent. Britain's presumptive leaders, Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak, compete with bellicose rhetoric promising ever tougher sanctions – without a word that makes any sense. However, if you hint at skepticism on this topic, you will be criticized as "pro-Putin" and anti-Ukraine. Sanctions are the battle cry of the West's crusade.

The reality of sanctions against Russia is that they are an invitation to retaliation. Putin is free to freeze Europe this winter. It has cut supply from major pipelines, such as Nord Stream 80, by up to 1 percent. World oil prices have risen and the flow of grain and other food products from Eastern Europe to Africa and Asia has been suspended.

Household gas bills in Britain face trebling within a year. The main beneficiary is none other than Russia, whose energy exports to Asia have soared, pushing its balance of payments into unprecedented surplus. The ruble is one of the world's strongest currencies this year, having strengthened by nearly 50 percent since January. Moscow's overseas assets have been frozen and its oligarchs have moved their yachts, but there is no sign that Putin cares. He does not have any electorate that will bother him.

The interdependence of the world's economies, long seen as an instrument of peace, has become a weapon of war. Politicians around the NATO table have been very cautious about escalating military aid to Ukraine. They understand military deterrence. However, they seem completely innocent about the economy. Here they all imitate Dr. Strangelove (film character associated with nuclear destruction in the Cold War - vp). They want to bomb Russia's economy "to the stone age".

I would be intrigued to know if any document was ever handed to Boris Johnson's cabinet that would predict the likely outcome of sanctions on Russia for Britain. The assumption seems to have been that if trade embargoes hurt, they work. Since they don't directly kill people, they are somehow an acceptable form of aggression. They are based on a neo-imperial assumption that Western countries have the right to order the world as they wish. They are enforced, if not through threats of arms, then through capitalist muscle in a globalized economy. Since they are mostly imposed on small and weak states that quickly get out of the headlines, their purpose has been mainly symbolic of "good feeling".

The rare scholar of this subject is the American economic historian, Nicholas Mulder, who points out that more than 30 "wars" with sanctions in the last 50 years have had minimal impact - if not counterproductive. They aim to "frighten the peoples to restrain their princes". Nothing else has had the opposite effect. From Cuba to Korea, from Myanmar to Iran, from Venezuela to Russia, autocratic regimes have been entrenched, elites strengthened and freedoms suppressed. Sanctions seem to instill stability and self-reliance in themselves and their weaker victims. Almost all of the world's oldest dictatorships have benefited from Western sanctions.

Moscow is neither small nor weak. Another observer, the Russia expert of the Royal United Defense Services Institute, Richard Connolly, analyzed Putin's response to the sanctions imposed on him - since the seizure of Crimea and Donbass in 2014. Their objective was to reverse course. of Russia in those regions and deter further aggression. Their failure could hardly be clearer. Apologists justify this because the embargoes were too weak. The current ones, perhaps the toughest ever imposed on a major world power, may not work yet, but they will likely work in time. They are said to have increased Russia's demand for microchips and drone spare parts. They will soon force Putin to beg for peace.

If Putin prays, he will be on the battlefield. Domestically, Connolly illustrates how Russia is "slowly adapting to new circumstances". Sanctions have boosted trade with China, Iran and India. They suit "insiders connected to Putin and the ruling circle, making huge profits from import substitution." McDonald's locations across the country have been replaced by a Russian-owned chain called "Vkusno & tochka" ("Delicious and dot"). Certainly the economy is weaker, but Putin is, if nothing else, stronger as sanctions are creating a new economic sphere across Asia, embracing an ever-expanding role for China. Is this foreseen?

Meanwhile, the West and its peoples are mired in recession. Leadership has been shaken and uncertainty has spread in Britain, France, Italy and the US. Gas-dependent Germany and Hungary are very close to dancing to Putin's tune. Living costs are rising everywhere. However, still no one dares to question the sanctions. It is sacrilegious to admit their failure or to conceive of retreat. The West has been lured into the eternal irony of aggression. Perhaps, its most obvious victim is the aggressor. Maybe, after all, we should get on with the fight. /Telegraph/