Liz Truss, Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland), shared that there is an “off ramp” for the Russian Federation and sanctions implemented on Russian Federation-based financial institutions, companies, and individuals (oligarchs) could be removed if there is “a full ceasefire and withdrawal” and Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin agreed to refrain from future military aggression and there would be “snapback sanctions.”   

Antony Blinken, United States Secretary of State, shared sanctions against the Russian Federation were “not designed to be permanent” and could “go away” if President Putin changed his behavior. 

Really?  Seriously?  Refrain from future military aggression, change his behavior?  All President Putin needs to do is cease fighting and withdraw?  Say “auf Wiedersehen” and all is forgiven?  What if President Putin says “до свидания” to President Volodymyr Zelensky?  In Russian, that means “until we meet again.”    

Secretary Truss and Blinken seem to be competing for the “1938 Neville Chamberlain Prize For Astutely Judging An Adversary.”  Herr Hitler was certainly deterred… for two days. 

And how have sanctions imposed upon the Russian Federation deterred behavior thus far?  Based upon the history, sanctions have not deterred aggression, though sanctions may have helped to determine the type of aggression.   

• 1990- Russian Federation invades of eastern Transnistria region in Moldova (which borders Ukraine). 

• 2008- Russian Federation invades Georgia and Bush-Cheney Administration (2001-2009) along with the European Union (EU) and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) implement sanctions.  

• 2014- Russian Federation invades and annexes Crimean Peninsula in Ukraine.  Obama-Biden Administration (2009-2017) along with EU and NATO implement sanctions.   

• 2014- Russian Federation invades and supports disruption in Donbas region (Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts) of Ukraine.  Obama-Biden Administration along with EU and NATO implement sanctions.   

• 2015- Russian Federation invited by Bashar al-Assad, President of Syria, to assist the government with its civil war and is responsible for substantial infrastructure damage and death.  Obama-Biden Administration along with EU and NATO implement sanctions. 

• 2022- Russian Federation (with assistance of Belarus) invades Ukraine.  Biden-Harris Administration (2021- ) along with EU and NATO implement sanctions. 

First, until the Russian Federation has reimbursed fully Ukraine and those countries impacted by the Russian Federation’s attack upon Ukraine, no sanctions should be removed.  Not one. 

United States taxpayers should not shoulder the burden of paying for, paying interest on the loan of what will be approximately US$20 billion in expenses thus far incurred relating to the attack by the Russian Federation upon the territory of Ukraine.   

The Biden-Harris Administration (2021- ) and members of the United States Congress will seek to increase spending by the United States Department of Defense and for every intelligence gathering agency.  Spending on defense-related programs means increased employment opportunities for states and their congressional districts- and politicians always want to bring large defense contracts, multi-year defense contracts, to their constituents.   

That means more deficit spending, adding to the national debt.  Even if the Russian Federation exits the territory of Ukraine, the United States will increase its deployment of troops and equipment throughout the European continent for years- at minimum until President Putin is no longer head of state, head of government, or controlling government from another position.  He is sixty-nine years old. 

The Russian Federation will argue that only by removing sanctions will it have the means to earn funds to direct to Ukraine.  Of course, this is if the Russian Federation agrees that it is responsible for any reimbursement.   

Moscow will likely use this logic:  The damage inflicted upon Ukraine is the responsibility of Ukraine because had the Volodymyr Zelensky Administration in Kyiv agreed long ago to the demands of Moscow, there would have been no invasion and thus no damage and thus no need for reimbursement.  Basically, the destruction of infrastructure is the fault of Ukraine so it should self-insure. 

Second, an additional mechanism to add to funding to reimburse Ukraine and other countries should include a fee on all exports from the Russian Federation, paid by the purchaser of those exports.  This scheme would increase the cost of products for exporters and importers- but also hasten and make transparent the effort to quickly amass as much funding as possible. 

“Show me the money” and “Follow the money” 

In an interview, Mr. Kyrylo Shevchenko, President of the Central Bank of Ukraine, shared that the US$28 billion in funds held in the United Kingdom on behalf of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation should be directed towards rebuilding the infrastructure in Ukraine damaged due to the attack by the Russian Federation.  The Russian Federation has approximately US$640 billion in foreign reserves prior to the 24 February 2022 attack upon Ukraine.  Approximately half of the funds are held outside of the Russian Federation.   

The government of Ukraine has reported the value of infrastructure devastation from the attacks from the Russian Federation exceeds US$500 billion.  The Central Bank of the Russian Federation assets located outside of the country are estimated to be approximately US$340 billion.  There will be claims against those assets by the governments of Ukraine, Poland, Slovakia, Romania, Hungary, and Moldova, along with individuals and companies.   

The United States should seek compensation from Russian Federation assets to reimburse taxpayers for military assistance, humanitarian assistance, commercial assistance, and financial assistance provided to Ukraine. 

Likely there will be efforts to add a reparation recovery tax to certain exports from the Russian Federation to provide compensation funds.  The government of the Russian Federation will vigorously oppose this prospect.