November 29, 2022
To Designate or Not? Russia and SST Status
As Ukraine implores the world to condemn Russia to pariah status, a live question is whether the United States should designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism (SST). Proponents of the SST designation are compelled in part by the mounting accounts and images of mass atrocities and graves in Ukraine, while skeptics question if the designation could produce more secondary consequences than positive leverage. Policymakers supporting Ukraine face a sense of increased urgency to impair Russia’s ability to wage war in Ukraine or threaten its neighbors in the future as Russia employs increasingly aggressive tactics, including targeting civilians and energy infrastructure and issuing veiled threats of nuclear war.
The United States is unlikely to expend its political and financial resources to impose additional secondary sanctions as part of its Russia sanctions regime
However, an SST designation is not the appropriate economic or diplomatic tool to use in this context. The United States should not designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism because the designation is a largely symbolic tool that provides minimum additional economic leverage beyond the sanctions and export controls already imposed and entails harmful consequences, such as prioritizing U.S. plaintiff access to frozen Russian assets and narrowing the diplomatic space globally. Instead, U.S. policymakers should create a new designation, such as “aggressor state,” to condemn Russia for its actions against Ukraine while circumventing harmful measures under an SST designation. Under a new aggressor state designation, the United States could leverage maximum diplomatic and economic tools, create a blueprint for coordination with partners, and have a mechanism to discuss a phased delisting.
Read the full article from Lawfare.
More from CNAS
-
Economic Security in Asia Part 1: China's growing pains with Dan Rosen
Podcast
Dan Rosen, leading expert on China's economy and head of the Rhodium Group's China practice, joins Emily and Geoff to talk about the recently concluded third plenum meetings i...
By Emily Kilcrease & Geoffrey Gertz
-
What a Bunch of Malarkey!
Podcast
Emily and Geoff discuss the U.S. presidential election and what that might mean for economic security policy. They get into trade policy, what both candidates would do to comp...
By Emily Kilcrease & Geoffrey Gertz
-
How U.S.-China Competition Upended the International Economic Order and What the United States Can Do to Fix It
Podcast
On June 26, CNAS hosted an event to discuss a new report, Disorderly Conduct: How U.S.-China Competition Upended the International Economic Order and What the United States Ca...
By Emily Kilcrease, Geoffrey Gertz, Adam Tong & Peter Harrell
-
Sanctions by the Numbers: 2023 Year in Review
Reports
Executive Summary In 2023, the Biden administration continued to prioritize sanctions as a key tool to support U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives. The United...
By Rowan Scarpino & Jocelyn Trainer
