Trump Considers “Large-Scale” Sanctions on Russia Amidst Ukraine Conflict

Former U.S.President Donald Trump is considering imposing significant sanctions and tariffs on Russia in an effort to broker a ceasefire and ultimately achieve a peace settlement with Ukraine. This declaration comes in the wake of a massive missile and drone attack launched by russia on Ukrainian infrastructure. The potential sanctions are being weighed as the U.S.has paused military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine, actions intended to pressure Kyiv into accepting a ceasefire agreement. Trump stated it is indeed “easier” to deal with Russia than Ukraine, a sentiment that has drawn both support and criticism.

The former president outlined his intentions in a post on his Truth Social platform on Friday morning, stating he was considering fresh sanctions on Moscow. This move comes as Trump faces criticism for allegedly increasing pressure on Ukraine to reach a deal while downplaying Russia’s role in initiating the war with its invasion three years ago. The situation is further intricate by the ongoing debate over the effectiveness of existing sanctions and the potential consequences of escalating economic pressure.

Trump’s statement reads: “Based on the fact that Russia is absolutely ‘pounding’ Ukraine on the battlefield right now,I am strongly considering large-scale Banking Sanctions,Sanctions,and Tariffs on Russia until a cease Fire and FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ON PEACE IS REACHED.” The implications of such a move coudl be far-reaching, impacting not only the Russian economy but also global trade and diplomatic relations.

“To Russia and Ukraine, get to the table right now, before it is indeed too late.Thank you!!!”

Trump indicated that these prospective sanctions could remain in affect until both Russia and Ukraine reach a ceasefire and an extensive peace settlement. The timing of this announcement is especially noteworthy, given the recent pause in U.S. military and intelligence support to Ukraine, which considerably diminishes Ukraine’s ability to defend itself and strike within Russian territory. This pause has raised concerns among some that it could embolden Russia and undermine efforts to achieve a lasting peace.

Trump Says Russia Easier to Deal With

The decision to pause U.S. military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine has drawn criticism, with some suggesting it emboldens Russia. Sean Savett, a former spokesperson for the National Security Council under former U.S. President Joe Biden, characterized Trump’s comments regarding sanctions as an “admission of naivety,” particularly in light of Russia’s recent large-scale attack on Ukraine. The debate over the best approach to the conflict continues to intensify, with differing views on the role of sanctions, military aid, and diplomatic engagement.

According to Ukrainian officials, at least 10 people were injured in Russia’s overnight launch of 67 missiles and nearly 200 drones at ukraine. The attacks targeted critical energy infrastructure, further straining Ukraine’s resources and resilience. The ongoing attacks underscore the urgency of finding a resolution to the conflict, but the path to peace remains uncertain.

In response to questions from reporters in the Oval Office, Trump dismissed concerns that Russian President Vladimir Putin might be exploiting the intelligence pause to intensify attacks on Ukraine. “I think he’s doing what anybody else would,” Trump said of Putin. This outlook reflects Trump’s broader view that a pragmatic approach to dealing with Russia is necessary to achieve a resolution.

Trump further elaborated on his outlook, stating: “I’m finding it more challenging, frankly, to deal with Ukraine. And they don’t have the cards.” This statement suggests that Trump believes Ukraine is in a weaker negotiating position and that a different approach is needed to break the stalemate.

“In terms of getting a final settlement, it might potentially be easier dealing with Russia, which is surprising, as they have all the cards, and they’re bombing the hell out of them right now.”

Looking ahead, Trump is dispatching a delegation to Saudi Arabia next week to engage with Ukrainian officials. The delegation will include Secretary of state marco Rubio, National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff. This diplomatic effort suggests that Trump is seeking to explore alternative avenues for achieving a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

US Treasury Secretary Describes Biden’s Sanctions as “weak”

The U.S. Treasury Department is reportedly exploring potential sanctions targeting major Russian oil companies and oilfield service providers, according to an Associated Press source. Treasury Secretary scott Bessent addressed the Economic Club of New York on Thursday, emphasizing that the U.S. has maintained its existing sanctions on Russia and “will not hesitate to go all in should it provide leverage in peace negotiations.” Bessent’s remarks highlight the ongoing debate over the effectiveness of current sanctions and the potential for further action.

The Biden administration had previously imposed thousands of sanctions on Russian entities, individuals, and vessels, along with a price cap on Russian oil, following Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine. In its final weeks, the Biden administration imposed sanctions on Russian energy companies and vessels that shipped its oil, followed by sanctions on 250 targets. These measures aimed to cripple Russia’s economy and pressure Putin to end the war.

These measures included fresh sanctions on almost 100 critical Russian entities — including banks and companies operating in the country’s energy sector — that were previously sanctioned by the United States, increasing their secondary sanction risks. The layered approach to sanctions reflects the complexity of the situation and the ongoing effort to find the most effective way to influence Russia’s behavior.

Though, Bessent criticized the Biden administration’s sanctions on Russian energy as “egregiously weak,” attributing this to “stemming from worries about upward pressure on US energy prices.” This criticism underscores the political challenges of imposing sanctions that could have negative consequences for the U.S. economy.

“Per President Trump’s guidance, sanctions will be used explicitly and aggressively for immediate maximum impact,”
Bessent said.

Bessent added, “They will be carefully monitored to ensure that they are achieving specific objectives.” This commitment to monitoring and evaluation suggests that the trump administration is taking a data-driven approach to sanctions policy.

More Than 20,000 Sanctions Imposed on Russia As Ukraine Invasion

Trump’s consideration of new sanctions and tariffs on Russia follows reports that his administration is formulating plans to perhaps offer Russia sanctions relief. These plans reportedly include mechanisms to ease sanctions on Russia’s energy sector, according to sources familiar with the matter. The possibility of sanctions relief adds another layer of complexity to the situation and raises questions about the ultimate goals of U.S. policy.

As the invasion of Ukraine in Febuary 2022, Russia has been subjected to over 20,000 sanctions imposed by the united States and its allies. The U.S. alone has implemented approximately 6,433 sanctions against Russia as February 2022. the sheer number of sanctions reflects the international condemnation of Russia’s actions and the determination to hold Putin accountable.

U.S. sanctions on russia have targeted its oil and gas revenues,including a cap of $60 per barrel on Russia’s oil exports. The potential for further sanctions or the easing of existing ones remains a significant factor in the ongoing conflict and diplomatic efforts. The future of sanctions policy will likely depend on the evolving situation on the ground and the broader geopolitical context.

Trump’s Russia Sanctions Gambit: A Calculated Risk or Reckless Gamble?

Over 20,000 sanctions have been levied against Russia since the Ukraine conflict began, yet the conflict persists. This begs the question: are sanctions truly an effective tool for achieving peace, or do they simply escalate tensions?

Interviewer: Dr. Anya Petrova,a leading expert in international relations and sanctions policy,welcome to World Today News. The recent news about former President Trump’s proposal for “large-scale” sanctions against Russia has sparked a significant debate. Can you shed light on the effectiveness of sanctions as a foreign policy tool, particularly in this context?

Dr. Petrova: Thank you for having me. The question of sanctions effectiveness is complex, and there’s no single answer. While sanctions, including financial restrictions, trade embargoes, and asset freezes—the types of measures being considered by Mr. Trump—can be a powerful tool in international relations, their efficacy heavily depends on several crucial factors. The success of any sanction regime rests, fundamentally, on the specific geopolitical context, the targeted state’s economic resilience, and the international cooperation involved in its enforcement. mr. Trump’s proposed “large-scale” sanctions on Russia, while seemingly aggressive, need to be examined thru this multifaceted lens.

Interviewer: Mr. Trump’s proposed sanctions specifically mention banking sanctions and tariffs. How might these impact the Russian economy and, critically, could they truly force a ceasefire and peace agreement in Ukraine?

Dr. Petrova: Targeting Russia’s banking sector with complete sanctions—effectively cutting off access to international financial systems—would undoubtedly inflict significant economic pain. Similarly, broad tariffs on Russian goods would severely disrupt its trade relationships with the rest of the world. However, the likelihood of these measures directly causing a ceasefire and leading to a comprehensive peace agreement is debatable. History demonstrates that sanctions often lead to unintended consequences. For example,they can fuel resentment,strengthen authoritarian regimes,and even destabilize the targeted nation. Therefore, a strategic approach is essential, emphasizing a nuanced understanding of the potential ramifications far beyond immediate economic disruption. The crucial question is whether the pain inflicted outweighs the potential for further conflict escalation, a decision requiring careful analysis.

Interviewer: The article mentions criticism of the paused US military aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine. How does this factor into the overall effectiveness of any sanctions strategy?

Dr.Petrova: The simultaneous pausing of military aid and intelligence sharing with ukraine fundamentally weakens Ukraine’s position at the negotiating table. It creates a power imbalance that arguably diminishes the leverage of potential sanctions against Russia. Essentially, the effectiveness of sanctions is substantially reduced if the target’s adversary is concurrently weakened. A comprehensive strategy must consider all these aspects.Simultaneously imposing sanctions while undermining the recipient’s defense capabilities undercuts the initiative’s potential success.

Interviewer: Mr. Trump has reportedly stated that he finds it easier to deal with Russia than Ukraine. How does this perception influence the viability of a sanctions strategy predicated on a negotiated peace?

Dr. Petrova: Such a perception presents a significant challenge. A peaceful resolution hinges on engaging both parties equitably. A notion that working with Russia is inherently easier than with Ukraine, nonetheless of the merits, suggests a biased approach to negotiations. Effective diplomacy requires treating all parties with respect and impartiality,an aspect frequently overlooked in high-stakes,emotionally charged situations. A negotiation strategy leaning towards one party while disparaging another is unlikely to produce lasting peace. Negotiations rely on mutual respect and acknowledgment of each party’s concerns and priorities.

Interviewer: The article highlights differing opinions on the strength of current US sanctions against Russia. How can we assess whether existing sanctions are truly effective, or if a more stringent approach is necessary?

Dr.Petrova: Assessing the efficacy of sanctions requires a comprehensive evaluation using several metrics. This includes reviewing the impact on the targeted economy (Russia, in this instance), evaluating the degree to which the sanctions have achieved their stated objectives, and analyzing the collateral damage. We need to move beyond simplistic