Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025: Transatlantic Sanctions, Istanbul Talks, and the Kremlin’s Strategic Calculus
- Matthew Parish
- 4 minutes ago
- 4 min read
In May 2025 the geopolitical landscape surrounding the Russo-Ukrainian war is experiencing a significant shift. The United States and the European Union have each - in apparent coordination - intensified their efforts to pressure Moscow through coordinated sanctions, while diplomatic initiatives aimed at brokering peace are facing new challenges. Central to these developments is the proposed Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025, spearheaded by US Senator Lindsey Graham, and the anticipated—but ultimately aborted—Istanbul peace talks due to 15 May 2025 between Presidents Zelensky and Putin.
The Sanctioning Russia Act: A US Legislative Initiative
Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican close to President Trump and who has a significant voice in foreign affairs in US politics, has introduced the Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025 (S.1241), a bipartisan bill designed to impose stringent economic penalties on Russia and her trading partners. The full text of the bill is here:
Key provisions of the bill include:
Enhanced Primary Sanctions: Targeting Russian officials, financial institutions, state-affiliated entities, and the energy sector.
Secondary Sanctions: Imposing a 500% tariff on imports from countries purchasing Russian oil, natural gas, petroleum products or uranium.
Additional Measures: Prohibiting US investments in Russia, banning imports of Russian uranium, and excluding Russian entities from international financial messaging services.
Senator Graham described these measures as “bone-crushing” sanctions aimed at compelling Russia to engage in genuine peace negotiations. The bill has garnered substantial bipartisan support, with over 70 senators co-sponsoring, indicating a strong likelihood of passage.
EU-US Sanctions Coordination: A Unified Front
The European Union, concurrently, has been advancing its 17th sanctions package against Russia, focusing on the energy and financial sectors. This package includes penalties against approximately 200 shadow fleet tankers, restrictions on 30 companies trading dual-use goods, and sanctions on 75 individuals linked to Russia’s military industry. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot emphasised the need for deeper collaboration with the United States to “suffocate” Russia’s economy and force an end to the war.
European diplomats view the US sanctions, particularly the Graham bill, as a pivotal component in pressuring Moscow. The EU’s strategy involves aligning its measures with US actions to present a unified front, thereby increasing the effectiveness of the sanctions regime.
Meanwhile the United Kingdom has announced new sanctions on 9 May 2025 on up to 100 vessels in Russia's so-called "shadow fleet" of vessels with obscure ownership and flags of convenience, often ageing vessels carrying Russian oil, which causes them to be detained if they berth at British ports or risk detention if they enter British waters. This measure also applies to vessels suspected of sabotage or espionage operations. British banking sanctions against Russia remain tight.
The Istanbul Peace Talks: A Missed Opportunity
Amidst these sanction efforts, a potential diplomatic breakthrough was anticipated with the scheduled peace talks in Istanbul between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin today 15 May 2025. US President Donald Trump expressed interest in attending the summit, contingent on Putin’s participation. However on the evening of May 14, President Putin announced he would not attend, instead sending a lower-level delegation led by Kremlin aide Vladimir Medinsky and Deputy Defence Minister Alexander Fomin.
President Zelensky had insisted on direct negotiations with Putin, stating he would not engage with other Russian officials. The absence of Putin effectively scuttled the talks, with Trump also withdrawing his attendance. This development was seen as a significant setback to peace efforts, highlighting the complexities of diplomatic engagement in the ongoing conflict. While President Zelensky has said he would send a delegation to Istanbul to meet the Russian officials present, little is expected out of these talks without the direct participation of the respective Presidents and without the attendance of President Trump.
Putin’s Strategic Calculus: Avoiding Direct Engagement
President Putin’s decision to abstain from the Istanbul talks can be interpreted through several strategic lenses:
Maintaining Negotiation Leverage: By avoiding direct talks, Putin preserves his ability to dictate the terms and timing of negotiations, preventing any perception of concession or weakness.
Avoiding International Pressure: A direct meeting with Zelensky and potential attendance by Trump could have subjected Putin to intense international scrutiny and pressure to agree to unfavourable terms compared to the maximalist terms he has consistently maintained in public.
Domestic Political Considerations: Engaging in high-profile talks without guaranteed outcomes could risk domestic criticism, especially if perceived as yielding to Western demands.
Prospects and Potential Outcomes
The current trajectory suggests several possible scenarios:
Enhanced Sanctions Regime: With the failure of the Istanbul talks, the US and EU are likely to proceed with more aggressive sanctions, aiming to cripple Russia’s economic capabilities and force a return to negotiations.
Stalemate and Prolonged Conflict: Absent diplomatic engagement the conflict may persist, leading to further humanitarian crises and regional instability.
Alternative Mediation Efforts: Countries like Brazil and China have expressed interest in facilitating negotiations, potentially offering alternative avenues for dialogue.
Conclusion
The Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025 represents a significant escalation in the US strategy to compel Russia to cease its aggression in Ukraine. Coupled with the EU’s coordinated sanctions efforts, the international community is signalling a unified stance against the ongoing conflict. However the collapse of the Istanbul talks underscores the challenges inherent in diplomatic resolutions. As the situation evolves, sustained international pressure and cohesive strategies remain essential to achieving a peaceful resolution.