Muslim World Report

Biden Sticks to Trump's Sanctions Against Russia Amid Tensions

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Apr 13, 2025 9:54 AM | 6 min read | 1149 words

TL;DR: President Biden continues sanctions against Russia from the Trump era, raising debates about their effectiveness and moral implications. These sanctions risk alienating U.S. voters weary of foreign conflicts and may inadvertently strengthen Putin’s regime. Both continuance and lifting of sanctions carry significant diplomatic and economic consequences.

The Sanction Dilemma: Biden’s Continuation of Trump-Era Policies on Russia

In a decisive move echoing his predecessor’s policies, President Biden has chosen to maintain sanctions against Russia that were initially enacted during Donald Trump’s administration. This decision comes amid ongoing geopolitical tensions and aggressive actions from the Kremlin, particularly regarding the conflict in Ukraine. Biden’s move reflects a broader commitment to confront authoritarian regimes and supports a U.S.-led geopolitical agenda aimed at countering Kremlin aggression (Baracani & Kassim, 2024).

However, this choice raises critical questions about the efficacy and morality of such measures:

  • Critics claim this continuity may deepen animosity and worsen economic hardships for ordinary Russians.
  • As U.S. public sentiment grows weary of foreign conflicts, Biden’s decision risks alienating a war-weary electorate.
  • The irony is striking: in a political environment where even minimal actions are surprising, Biden’s decision highlights low expectations for his administration’s foreign policy (Hine & Floridi, 2023).

The Implications of Maintaining Sanctions

The implications of maintaining sanctions against Russia are significant:

  1. U.S. Foreign Policy Legacy: It underscores a persistent U.S. policy that often prioritizes coercive measures over diplomatic solutions (Kostić & Stefanović, 2021).
  2. Effectiveness of Sanctions: Critics suggest sanctions may entrench nationalist sentiment and strengthen authoritarian regimes, allowing leaders like Putin to frame themselves as defenders against Western intervention (Dursun Peksen, 2019; Tsouloufas & Rochat, 2023).

This raises a crucial question: Could these sanctions inadvertently strengthen domestic support for Putin?

The Potential for Escalation: What If Putin Responds?

Should President Putin escalate military actions due to the ongoing sanctions, the consequences could be dire:

  • Increase in military aggression may galvanize Russian public sentiment and unify nationalist support.
  • Potential humanitarian crises and extended conflicts could provoke direct confrontations between NATO forces and Russian military units (Mankoff, 2015).
  • Economic Implications: Heightened tensions could disrupt vital energy supplies, exacerbating the energy crisis and inflationary pressures globally (Dursun Peksen, 2019; Bobkin, 2022).

Sanction Effectiveness and Public Sentiment

The decision to continue sanctions must be examined through their effectiveness:

  • Critics argue that as economic conditions deteriorate, the result can obscure policymakers’ original goals.
  • Such sanctions often harm the populations they aim to assist, fueling resentment against the West (Wordliczek, 2023).

As public sentiment in the U.S. becomes increasingly tired of military engagements, Biden’s continuation of sanctions risks alienating an electorate that may view these measures as ineffective or harmful. If the sanctions lead to significant hardship for average Russians, without displacing Putin, the political calculus in the U.S. could shift dramatically. Thus, the ongoing sanctions prompt critical inquiries about the efficacy of coercive statecraft versus the potential for diplomatic engagement in the face of authoritarian governance.

What If Sanctions Are Lifted?

Conversely, lifting sanctions would send shockwaves through the international system:

  • Such a move might signal an attempt to re-engage Russia in dialogue, opening negotiations on critical issues such as nuclear arms control and the situation in Ukraine (Leoni, 2022).
  • However, it could also be seen as a sign of weakness, possibly emboldening not just Putin, but other authoritarian regimes as well (Hine & Floridi, 2023).

From an economic perspective, lifting sanctions could offer relief to the Russian economy, potentially restoring trade relationships. Yet, this approach risks deepening divides with allies who might view it as a betrayal of shared interests in promoting democratic governance and stability in Eastern Europe (Mousavian & Mahmoudieh, 2021).

Strategic Maneuvers: What Lies Ahead?

Moving forward, the intricate geopolitical landscape necessitates a recalibration of strategies among stakeholders:

  • Biden Administration: A critical reassessment of its policy toward Russia is imperative. While sanctions aim to counter aggression, fostering dialogue through back-channel communications may yield more productive results than a strictly punitive approach (Kostić & Stefanović, 2021).

  • Russia’s Narrative: Putin’s ability to frame Western sanctions as aggressive can galvanize nationalism, hindering U.S. foreign policy effectiveness.

NATO and European allies should prioritize collaboration over confrontation. Exploring cooperative avenues related to mutual security interests is vital for fostering a stable geopolitical environment (Zemánek, 2022).

The Broader Implications of Sanctions

The sanctions against Russia serve as a lens to view broader international relations issues and the efficacy of coercive statecraft. As stakeholders navigate this complex terrain, reassessing traditional strategies in favor of dialogue-oriented approaches could pave the way for a more stable future in a rapidly evolving global landscape.

These questions surrounding sanctions necessitate deeper examination of U.S. foreign policy strategies. If sanctions entrench authoritarianism and generate sympathy for leaders like Putin, the U.S. must evaluate whether this approach serves its long-term interests. Rather than relying solely on punitive measures, engaging in diplomatic avenues may lead to more favorable outcomes for American interests and global stability.

Moreover, the Biden administration’s stance on sanctions raises ethical questions regarding their humanitarian impact on civilian populations. It is essential to consider the implications of these measures on ordinary Russians, who may suffer greatly due to economic hardships.

Reimagining U.S. Foreign Policy

This moment calls for a reimagining of U.S. foreign policy regarding Russia. By fostering diplomatic engagement alongside accountability, the U.S. may navigate a path that advances both its strategic interests and the promotion of democratic principles.

As relationships between the U.S. and its allies evolve, maintaining open lines of communication and collaboration is crucial. The U.S. must work closely with allies to ensure a unified approach to Russia, grounded in shared values while addressing the challenges posed by an increasingly assertive Kremlin.

In summary, the challenges posed by ongoing sanctions against Russia necessitate a careful evaluation of U.S. foreign policy strategies. A commitment to dialogue, cooperation, and nuanced approaches may prove essential for fostering stability in a world marked by unpredictability and division.

References

  1. Baracani, E., & Kassim, H. (2024). The ‘Geopolitical Commission’: An End of Term Review. JCMS Journal of Common Market Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13673
  2. Dursun Peksen. (2019). Political Effectiveness, Negative Externalities, and the Ethics of Economic Sanctions. Ethics & International Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0892679419000327
  3. Hine, E., & Floridi, L. (2023). The Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights: In Search of Enaction, at Risk of Inaction. Minds and Machines. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-023-09625-1
  4. Kostić, M., & Stefanović, A. (2021). The Biden Administration and Arms Control. Politika nacionalne bezbednosti. https://doi.org/10.22182/pnb.2122021.3
  5. Marinov, N. (2005). Do Economic Sanctions Destabilize Country Leaders? American Journal of Political Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2005.00142.x
  6. Mankoff, J. (2015). Russia’s Asia Pivot: Confrontation or Cooperation? Asia Policy. https://doi.org/10.1353/asp.2015.0009
  7. Mousavian, S. H., & Mahmoudieh, Y. (2021). Evolution of the Biden administration’s approach to Iran nuclear deal and prospects for regional peace. Pathways to Peace and Security. https://doi.org/10.20542/2307-1494-2021-2-129-138
  8. Wordliczek, R. (2023). Revisiting the effectiveness of economic sanctions in the context of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Canadian Foreign Policy Journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/11926422.2023.2198247
  9. Zemánek, L. (2022). Russia’s Sovereignty and Emergence of Pragmatic Polycentrism. Governance and Politics. https://doi.org/10.24833/2782-7062-2022-1-1-63-99
← Prev Next →