Sanctions against Moscow for its violation of international law in Ukraine are important and worth maintaining as a statement of what the West stands for, even if they won’t change the policy of a dictator unlikely to be swayed by the impact they have on his people and may even allow him for a time at least to mobilize them on an anti-Western basis.
And while the imposition, and even strengthening, of sanctions against Moscow regarding its actions in Crimea and the Donbas may not lead the current leader of the Russian Federation to change course, dropping them will have real consequences for him and for the influence of the West in support of international law.
On the one hand, if sanctions are reduced because businesses in the West want profit and governments want to deal with Russia on other issues, Vladimir Putin not only will have won this round simply by waiting out the West, but he will take it as a given that he can engage in other aggressive actions in the future – and get away with them when the Western democracies grow tired.
If sanctions end, that will send a message to the people of Russia that the Kremlin has won, undercutting those many heroic people there who oppose the authoritarian Putin regime and who hope to build a very different Russia after he passes from the scene, as he inevitably will. They will be weakened, and those who want to continue Mr. Putin’s course will be strengthened.
And on the other hand, if the sanctions are lifted, that will send another and even more profound message: the West is not prepared to stand up for its principles and, consequently, rogue leaders like Mr. Putin can get away with almost any violation of international norms as long as they have weapons that no one wants to see used.
As a result, ever more countries will go nuclear on the assumption that having such weapons not only means “never having to say you’re sorry,” but also allows you to do whatever you want. Consequently, the sanctions against Mr. Putin’s criminal behavior must be maintained – not only in the hope that Russia will ultimately change, but also so that international law will triumph.
These thoughts are prompted by Ukrainian commentator Vitaliy Portnikov’s question of June 19: “Crimean sanctions – an instrument or a symbol?” It was a question prompted by Berlin’s renewed commitment to maintain sanctions even as it allows Moscow back into the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (ru.krymr.com/a/vitaliy-portnikov-krymskie-sankcii-instrument-ili-simvol/30008024.html).
Sanctions are, in fact, both an instrument and a symbol – an instrument, even if they do not change the policy of their immediate target quickly, and a symbol of what the West stands for with regard to Russia, the rest of the world and, not unimportantly, itself. Tragically, those in the West who are prepared to give up all this in pursuit of short-term gains are growing in number.
That is something dictators like Mr. Putin have long counted on. Most of them know that playing the long game will work for them because there will always be voices in the Western democracies who will call for reaching out and overcoming differences regardless of what those regimes have done.
But the most important victories the West has won in the last half century have come precisely when it stood up for its principles, when it could appeal to others to do the same, and when leaders did not sell out in the name of profit and convenience.
That’s a point, as Mr. Portnikov makes clear, that needs to be repeated again and again.
Paul Goble is a long-time specialist on ethnic and religious questions in Eurasia who has served in various capacities in the U.S. State Department, the Central Intelligence Agency and the International Broadcasting Bureau, as well as at the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The article above is reprinted with permission from his blog called “Window on Eurasia” (http://windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com/).