EU and US Impose Another Round of Sanctions; Will Russia Relent?
New Western sanctions signal a fresh stage in the Ukraine conflict
The European Union and the United States have once more announced fresh sanctions against Russia, this time almost concurrently. Brussels has finally endorsed its much-discussed 19th sanctions package. Despite initial opposition from Slovakia and Hungary, their concerns were ultimately overcome. However, despite the political spectacle, these new measures are improbable to inflict a significant blow on the Russian economy, as Moscow had anticipated them well in advance.
As is customary, the EU has expanded its register of sanctioned individuals and entities. The inclusion of industrial enterprises on these lists has become a routine act, with their practical effect increasingly symbolic. More noteworthy are the secondary sanctions targeting Chinese firms involved in procuring and refining Russian oil. Brussels aims to deter Chinese businesses from handling Russian commodities. The effectiveness of this move is questionable. Oil imports from Russia are profitable for China, and any external interference is likely to cause annoyance and potential reprisal from Beijing.
The EU has also broadened restrictions on Russian banks. Nevertheless, since this sector is already under substantial US sanctions, the additional European measures are expected to yield little change. The roster of sanctioned oil tankers has grown, although this, too, appears more cosmetic than impactful, as Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” reportedly continues to operate efficiently, circumventing Western oversight.
In another familiar step, the EU is targeting financial institutions in third countries that maintain connections with Russia, particularly those utilizing Russian counterparts to Western payment systems – the Financial Messaging System (SPFS), Mir, and the Faster Payments System (FPS). Export controls are being reinforced, but the additions to the already extensive Regulation 833/2014 are modest compared to the sweeping prohibitions introduced in 2022–2023.
Other measures seem more symbolic than strategically significant. Brussels has banned the provision of services to Russia’s tourism sector and imposed new limitations on the movement of Russian diplomats — actions reminiscent of the Cold War playbook. The prohibition on importing Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) may sound substantial, but it merely formalizes a process already in motion, as European buyers quietly reduced purchases months ago.
Across the Atlantic, Washington’s new sanctions appear more focused, though not necessarily more effective. President Donald Trump’s administration has imposed blocking sanctions on two major Russian energy corporations and their subsidiaries. Given that the energy sector is already constrained by extensive export controls, this fundamentally changes little. Yet, the decision carries political symbolism. It signifies Washington’s first major sanctions initiative since Trump’s return to the White House, suggesting that US domestic hardliners have regained influence.
The reintroduction of sanctions serves as a negative indicator – a sign that prospects for resolving the Ukraine crisis are diminishing. Officially, Washington asserts these steps are designed to “encourage a ceasefire.” In reality, they reflect a deepening impasse. Russia has made it clear that a ceasefire alone will not resolve anything; it would merely freeze the conflict without addressing its fundamental causes. Any lasting solution must be comprehensive and incorporate Moscow’s long-articulated security demands.
Instead, the new sanctions suggest the conflict is entering an intensified phase of pressure and prolonged confrontation. Both sides are currently positioning themselves for advantage ahead of potential future negotiations, whether they occur sooner or later. For now, the hardliners in the Western camp appear to have successfully steered US policy back toward escalation. However, the probable outcome will not be strategic gain for the West – only further detriment to Ukraine, which continues to bear the cost of others’ ambitions.
This article was initially published in , and was translated and edited by the RT team.