Russia’s invasion of Ukraine almost a year ago today was met with an unprecedented series of sanctions that got more painful as the months passed.

Russia’s banks were largely cut off from the global financial system, tens of billions of dollars in assets were frozen, embargoes of energy and other Russian products were imposed, and oligarchs and political leaders seen as getting rich off the Putin regime were targeted. Separately, over 1,000 of the world’s biggest companies, including Apple and McDonald’s, cut ties with Russia.

But despite all this, the Russian economy has performed surprisingly well. In fact, Russia recorded a record current account surplus in 2022, meaning it exported more than it imported, thanks to a boom in energy revenue. And so, despite the sanctions and costly blunders on the battlefield, Putin’s war machine marches on in Ukraine.

So why haven't the sanctions worked?

Peter Rutland, who has studied the Soviet and Russian economy for over four decades, argues there are four major reasons Putin has managed to shrug off the sanctions. But the Wesleyan scholar also explains why that may begin to change as the war enters its second year.

Bryan Keogh

Deputy Managing Editor and Senior Editor of Economy and Business, The Conversation U.S.

How Putin has shrugged off unprecedented economic sanctions over Russia’s war in Ukraine – for now

Peter Rutland, Wesleyan University

The US and dozens of other nations have punished Russia with round after round of sanctions – yet the Russian economy is expected to grow in 2023.

Essential briefings

How the west is finally hitting back against China’s dominance of green technology

Economy and security on the ballot in Nigeria – 5 things to watch in presidential election

Hiring more social scientists could be the solution to Canada’s innovation issue

UK shoppers are choosing bricks over clicks, but here’s why it isn’t the end for online retail

Quote of the week 💬

  • “Purchasing property as a primary home is considered more ethical than acquiring property for investment, as housing is considered a basic necessity. Property for investment, however, is owned for personal profit, often without the owner’s intending to ever live there. Investors may purchase homes that can be “fixed and flipped” and sell them at a profit or lease them to renters."

    – Désirée Lim, assistant professor of philosophy at Penn State, from her story The ethics of home ownership in an age of growing inequality

Technology

Business

Consumers

Workers

More from The Conversation