News

The growing crisis in the Strait of Hormuz could permanently reshape global energy routes, according to Petras Katinas. In a recent feature by Adnkronos, the outlet examined how escalating tensions in the Gulf have disrupted oil and LNG flows. The article highlights the broader geopolitical stakes as the war transforms one of the world’s most vital maritime corridors into a theater of economic conflict.

Petras Katinas, a Research Fellow in Climate, Energy and Defence within the Energy and Security Programme and the Open Climate Programme at RUSI Europe in Brussels, provided a detailed analysis of the unfolding situation. He noted that oil flows through the Strait have fallen to around 20 million barrels per day. However, Saudi Arabia continues to export roughly 5 million barrels per day via the Red Sea, offering temporary relief to global markets. Katinas warned that this stability is fragile. “The United States and China have bought time for the market,” he explained, but sustained supply declines could trigger a structural shortage in both oil and LNG markets if the blockade persists.

Petras Katinas emphasized that prolonged disruption could shift the crisis from price volatility to a physical supply shortage. He pointed to Iran’s efforts to maintain exports through alternative routes in Pakistan, the Caspian region, and Central Asia, despite severe sanctions.

“Russia stands to benefit financially from higher global prices. Moscow could exploit the instability to exert pressure on Europe, echoing the energy leverage seen in 2022,” said Katinas.

In response, the European Union is accelerating efforts to reduce dependence on geopolitically risky suppliers. Katinas stressed that the AccelerateEU strategy should be viewed as a long-term economic security plan. He argued that the Hormuz crisis reinforces the need to expand renewables and nuclear energy. Even if a ceasefire occurs, recovery will be slow. Mine clearance may take weeks, but restoring damaged infrastructure could require months or years. As Petras Katinas concluded, the damage to shipping volumes and investment flows could permanently redefine global energy routes.

To read the full interview and expert insights from Petras Katinas, access the complete article published by Adnkronos via Mediapress24.

Further Analysis: Policy Briefs on the Hormuz Crisis

For a deeper assessment of the geopolitical and economic consequences of a prolonged disruption in the Gulf, readers can explore the FREE Network policy brief “Hormuz Blockade: Winners and Losers.” The analysis outlines how different global actors, including major exporters, energy-importing economies, and Russia, could gain or lose from sustained instability in the Strait of Hormuz. The brief provides a structured evaluation of market dynamics, trade rerouting, and long-term shifts in global energy flows.

In addition, the policy brief “Hormuz Shock: EU Gas Security and the Fragility of Decarbonization” examines the specific implications for Europe. It highlights how supply shocks could test the resilience of the EU’s gas market while complicating the bloc’s decarbonization agenda. The authors assess the risks to energy security, storage levels, and infrastructure, and discuss why accelerating clean energy deployment remains central to strengthening Europe’s long-term strategic autonomy.

Western sanctions against Russia come with economic consequences, but they remain necessary and justified. In an interview with Sveriges Radio, Torbjörn Becker shared his expert analysis on the economic impact of sanctions and why their long-term benefits outweigh the short-term costs. The discussion focused on the broader economic outlook and the policy trade-offs facing European countries.

Torbjörn Becker, Director of the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics (SITE) at the Stockholm School of Economics, emphasized that sanctions are designed to weaken Russia’s capacity to finance its war effort. He acknowledged that sanctions also affect European economies, including higher energy prices and slower growth. However, Torbjörn Becker argued that these costs must be viewed in the context of defending international law and European security.

According to Torbjörn Becker, the economic pressure on Russia is significant, even if it does not immediately produce dramatic effects. Sanctions limit access to advanced technology, reduce foreign investment, and increase long-term structural strain on the Russian economy. While Russia has adapted in some areas, the restrictions continue to constrain its development and future growth potential.

The interview also addressed public debate in Europe about the price of sanctions. Torbjörn Becker stressed that allowing aggression to proceed unchecked would carry far greater economic and political costs. In his assessment, sanctions represent a strategic investment in stability and security, rather than a short-term economic calculation.

To explore the full interview and Torbjörn Becker’s analysis, visit the interview on Sveriges Radio.

Further Reading: Russia’s Wartime Economy and Sanctions Impact

For deeper insight into Russia’s economic outlook and the long-term impact of sanctions on Russia, explore SITE’s report, Financing the Russian War Economy. This in-depth analysis examines Russia’s budget deficit, wartime spending, energy revenues, and fiscal sustainability under Western sanctions. The report provides an expert evaluation of how sanctions affect Russia’s war financing capacity and future growth prospects. It expands on the analysis presented by Torbjörn Becker and offers data-driven insights into the resilience and vulnerabilities of Russia’s wartime economy.

For additional research on sanctions policy, energy flows, and economic pressure mechanisms, see the latest publications in the SITE Sanctions Hub Evidence Base.

Do Economic Sanctions Work? Evidence and Policy Lessons

The effectiveness of economic sanctions has long been debated among policymakers, economists, and security experts. Some critics argue that sanctions are blunt instruments with uncertain outcomes, while others point to cases where sustained economic pressure influenced political behavior and policy change. Sanctions on Russia have renewed this debate, particularly regarding their impact on economic growth, fiscal stability, and war financing.

What does economic research reveal about when sanctions succeed or fail? Under what conditions do sanctions generate meaningful political or economic change? Drawing on decades of empirical evidence, the FREE Network policy brief explores the effectiveness of economic sanctions, their unintended consequences, and the lessons for future sanctions design. Read the full policy brief, “The Effects of Sanctions,” by Maria Perrotta Berlin, Assistant Professor at the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics.

Russia’s budget deficit is expanding far faster than expected, raising new concerns about the country’s economic outlook. According to the Russian newspaper Kommersant, the federal deficit for 2026 has already exceeded the government’s full-year forecast after only a few months. The development comes as growth projections are sharply revised downward despite relatively strong energy prices.

The Ministry of Finance initially projected a deficit of 3.8 trillion rubles for the entire year. Yet from January to April, the shortfall reached 5.9 trillion rubles. That figure is roughly 50 percent higher than the original annual estimate. Federal revenues totaled 11.7 trillion rubles during this period, while expenditures climbed to 17.6 trillion. The deficit now equals about 2.5 percent of Russia’s gross domestic product, nearly double the level recorded during the same period last year.

At the same time, Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak lowered the government’s 2026 growth forecast from 1.3 percent to just 0.4 percent. The downgrade comes even as oil prices remain a crucial source of income for the state. The Russian Central Bank projects an average oil price of 65 dollars per barrel this year. Officials argue that conservative price assumptions will help manage budget spending as war related costs continue to rise.

Commenting on the situation, Torbjörn Becker, Director of the Stockholm Institute of the Transition Economics, emphasized the decisive role of energy revenues. In an interview with TV4 Nyheterna, Torbjörn Becker explained that higher oil prices could significantly ease fiscal pressure on Moscow.

“If the price of oil remains above 100 dollars a barrel for a long time, it is a huge source of revenue for Russia. When the US eased its sanctions, Putin was able to essentially get paid twice as much for the oil overnight compared to before,” Becker said.

Torbjörn Becker’s analysis highlights how sensitive Russia’s finances remain to global energy markets. While deficits are rising and growth forecasts are weakening, sustained high oil prices could provide the Kremlin with valuable breathing room.

To read the full coverage and Torbjörn Becker’s comments, see the complete report by TV4 Nyheterna.

Explore Sanctions on Russia and Expert Economic Analysis

For further expert analysis on sanctions and Russia’s economic trajectory, visit the SITE Sanctions Hub. Explore the chronological overview of major sanction packages and Russian countermeasures by Date, Country, and Sector in the Sanctions Timeline.

The Evidence Base section of the SITE Sanctions Hub presents the latest publications, policy reports, and research findings, offering in-depth analysis and regularly updated data.

The Compliance Index provides a structured assessment of how effectively sanctions are implemented and enforced across jurisdictions. It offers comparative insights into compliance trends and policy performance.

Russia’s information war is spreading across Europe and appears to follow election cycles, according to Aage Borchgrevink. In an interview with Nettavisen, Borchgrevink described Russian influence operations as “a virus that is spreading around Europe.” He pointed to developments in Georgia in 2024 and ongoing activity in Armenia ahead of parliamentary elections. Borchgrevink also warned that similar patterns could emerge in Norway.

The comments came as heads of state and government from 40 European Political Community member states gathered in Yerevan to discuss European security. The broader context underscores growing concern about non-military pressure tactics used by Moscow.

Aage Borchgrevink on Russia’s Shadow War

Aage Borchgrevink is a senior advisor at the Norwegian Helsinki Committee. He agreed with findings from the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), which argues that the Kremlin is expanding a global media conglomerate to shape international narratives. According to ISW, this growing network includes media companies, influencers, and journalists across multiple countries.

Borchgrevink described these efforts as part of Russia’s “shadow war.” He emphasized that Europe should expect more coordinated influence campaigns in the coming years. Aage Borchgrevink stressed that awareness and preparedness are essential, as such operations may intensify and potentially reach Norway.

Cognitive Warfare and Expanding Media Networks

The Nettavisen article highlights ISW’s assessment that Russia is increasingly relying on cognitive warfare. This approach focuses on influencing how societies think and make political decisions. Rather than direct confrontation, it seeks to shape public debate and policy outcomes.

Russian state-linked outlets such as RT and the Telegram channel Rybar play a central role in this strategy. Rybar, led by Mikhail Sergeevich Zvinchuk, has been sanctioned by the EU, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. British authorities state that the company promotes support for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and interferes in democratic processes. ISW notes that cognitive warfare integrates selective truths, media cooperation agreements, and covert tools alongside diplomatic and economic pressure.

Norwegian Intelligence Warnings on Influence Operations

The Norwegian Armed Forces Intelligence Service echoed these concerns in its “Focus 2026” threat assessment. The report warns that Russia may increase covert influence operations in Europe, including fake social media accounts, cyber activities, and proxy actors. It describes these actions as hybrid or gray-zone tactics designed to create uncertainty and influence political decisions.

According to the report, Russia operates in ways that obscure state involvement. Espionage, sabotage, and influence operations are central tools. The aim is to shape attitudes and decisions among both the public and political authorities.

Read the Full Interview

Through his remarks, Aage Borchgrevink underscores the broader security implications of Russia’s information war. His expert analysis in Nettavisen highlights the need for vigilance as Europe faces both military and non-military pressure from Moscow.

Further Reading: Russia’s Strategic Actions

For deeper insight into Russia’s broader state strategies, explore the portal, Sanctions on Russia & Russian Economic Retaliation. While focused on sanctions policy, the platform provides essential context on Russia’s overall strategic posture.

New intelligence findings have cast doubt on the Kremlin’s fiscal transparency. In a recent article by Dagens.com, the outlet examines claims that Russia’s official budget figures may significantly understate the true cost of the war in Ukraine. The publication focuses on the growing Russian budget deficit and the sustainability of the country’s wartime economic strategy.

The article outlines how hidden expenditures and revised revenue projections may point to a deeper structural imbalance. As the war continues, scrutiny of Russia’s federal finances has intensified among policymakers and analysts.

Anders Olofsgård on Russia’s Budget Deficit

Anders Olofsgård, Deputy Director at SITE, provided expert analysis on the implications of the reported budget gap. Anders Olofsgård explained that Russia’s public finances have become increasingly opaque since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. He noted that off-budget spending and classified allocations obscure the true size of the Russian budget deficit.

According to Anders Olofsgård, this lack of transparency is a deliberate strategy. It helps shield the Kremlin from both domestic criticism and international scrutiny. At the same time, it allows authorities to project economic stability despite mounting fiscal pressure. Anders Olofsgård emphasized that credible and transparent fiscal reporting remains essential for assessing long-term economic resilience.

Mounting Pressure from War Costs and Sanctions

The Dagens.com article also discusses how declining energy revenues and rising defense expenditures are straining Kremlin finances. Western sanctions, oil price caps, and trade restrictions have limited revenue streams that once stabilized the budget. Meanwhile, military spending continues to grow.

The article suggests that Moscow may rely more heavily on reserve funds, domestic borrowing, and monetary adjustments to cover the shortfall. These measures could fuel inflation and weaken future growth. A persistent Russia budget deficit may also reduce fiscal flexibility and limit future public investment.

In his commentary, Anders Olofsgård noted that prolonged deficits can create structural vulnerabilities. If external shocks intensify, Russia’s economic outlook could deteriorate further. His expert insight highlights the broader policy impact of sustained wartime spending under sanctions pressure.

To explore the complete investigation and Anders Olofsgård’s commentary on the Russian budget deficit, read the full article in Dagens.com. The media report provides detailed context on intelligence findings and the broader debate surrounding Kremlin finances.

Further Reading: Sanctions on Russia & Russian Economic Retaliation

To gain deeper insight into Russia’s fiscal challenges and sanctions policy, visit the portal’s section Sanctions Timeline. It offers a comprehensive chronological overview of sanctions packages and Russian countermeasures.

Further Reading: The Russian Economy in the Fog of War

For readers seeking deeper insight into the fiscal pressures highlighted in Dagens.com, the report “The Russian Economy in the Fog of War” offers a timely and in-depth analysis. Authored by researchers at SITE, including Anders Olofsgård, the study examines Russia’s budget dynamics, macroeconomic trends, and the growing strain of wartime spending under sanctions.

The publication explores fiscal sustainability, capital flows, and the structural constraints shaping Russia’s war economy. It provides important context for understanding the Russian budget deficit discussed by Anders Olofsgård.

Read the full report on the Stockholm School of Economics Research Hub. The publication delivers a data-driven assessment of how sanctions, export controls, and military expenditures are reshaping Russia’s long-term economic outlook.

Russia’s war against Ukraine continues to reshape Europe’s security and economic landscape. In a recent article published by Europe Says, Aage Borchgrevink offers his analysis on Russia’s political direction, military ambitions, and the broader impact of Western sanctions. The piece examines how the Kremlin sustains its war effort despite mounting international restrictions and growing geopolitical pressure.

Russia’s Adaptation to Western Sanctions

Aage Borchgrevink, a senior advisor and Russia expert, explains that sanctions alone are unlikely to shift the Kremlin’s strategic goals in the short term. He argues that Russia’s leadership has prepared its economy and political system for prolonged confrontation with the West. According to Aage Borchgrevink, the Russian state has strengthened internal control while redirecting trade and financial flows toward non-Western partners. This adaptation, he notes, helps Moscow cushion the immediate policy impact of sanctions while maintaining its military campaign.

Borchgrevink stresses that Russia’s war economy is increasingly structured around state-led investment and defense production. He points out that redirected exports, parallel import schemes, and financial cooperation with countries outside the EU and G7 have helped stabilize revenues. This strategy reduces short-term vulnerability, even as structural weaknesses deepen beneath the surface.

Long-Term Economic and Political Outlook

The article also explores the wider political implications of this strategy. It discusses how Russia leverages energy exports, alternative trade networks, and domestic messaging to maintain stability at home. Aage Borchgrevink highlights that long-term pressure may still affect Russia’s economic outlook, particularly as technological restrictions and financial isolation accumulate over time. However, he emphasizes that policy coordination among Western allies remains critical. Without unified enforcement and monitoring, Russia’s sanctions risk losing effectiveness and credibility.

In his analysis, Aage Borchgrevink underscores that sustained and coordinated sanctions policy can gradually erode Russia’s strategic capacity. He notes that export controls on advanced technology and energy infrastructure could have lasting consequences for productivity and growth. The long-term impact of Russia sanctions, he argues, depends not only on scope but also on enforcement and international alignment.

To read the full analysis and Aage Borchgrevink’s commentary, access the complete article on Europe Says here.

Further Reading: The Russian Economy in the Fog of War

For readers seeking deeper insight into Russia’s economic trajectory under sanctions, the report The Russian Economy in the Fog of War offers a comprehensive analysis. Authored by researchers at the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics (SITE), the study examines macroeconomic trends, fiscal sustainability, capital flows, and structural constraints shaping Russia’s war economy.

Read the full report on the Stockholm School of Economics Research Hub. The report provides a data-driven assessment of how sanctions, export controls, and wartime spending are reshaping Russia’s long-term economic outlook.

Further Reading: International Policy Responses to Russia’s War

For deeper insight into the evolving sanctions landscape, explore our online web portal, Sanctions on Russia & Russian Economic Retaliation. This platform gathers expert analysis, data, and policy developments in one place.

Review the chronological overview of sanction packages and Russian countermeasures by Date, Country, and Sector in the Sanctions Timeline.

Discover the latest research in the Evidence Base section. Follow recent expert commentary from Sanction’s Hub team, including Aage Borchgrevink and other specialists, in our Media Highlights section.

In a recent article published by Geopolitika, Torbjörn Becker and more than one hundred other scholars in the field of Eastern European studies address narratives that attempt to justify Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The piece examines how arguments defending Moscow’s actions have gained traction in parts of the international debate, including through statements amplified on social media. Against the backdrop of continued war and geopolitical tension, the article highlights how such claims influence public opinion and policy discussions across Europe and the United States.

The signatories, including Torbjörn Becker, offer analysis of the economic and political realities behind Russia’s war in Ukraine. They challenge the notion that the invasion can be framed as a defensive response to Western policies. The article emphasizes that the conflict stems from strategic decisions by the Kremlin, not external provocation. The scholars also underscore how misinformation distorts the economic outlook and misleads audiences about the impact of sanctions against Russia and international support for Ukraine. These expert insights reinforce the importance of evidence-based analysis in countering misleading narratives.

The Media Landscape and War Narratives

The Geopolitika article also discusses the broader media environment in which these arguments circulate. It explores how influential figures, including Elon Musk, have contributed to controversial debates about Ukraine and Russia. The authors note that public commentary by high-profile individuals can shape perceptions of the war’s legitimacy and the effectiveness of Western sanctions. The discussion extends to the economic consequences of the conflict, including the resilience of Russia’s war economy and the long-term policy impact for Europe. By situating these narratives within a wider geopolitical framework, the scholars provide readers with essential context for understanding the stakes of the debate.

To read the full article and explore the commentary by Torbjörn Becker and more than one hundred other scholars in the field of Eastern European studies, visit Geopolitika for the complete feature.

Further Reading: Policy Landscape Surrounding Russia’s War in Ukraine

For deeper insight into the policy landscape surrounding Russia’s war in Ukraine, explore the timeline, Sanctions on Russia & Russian Economic Retaliation. The platform gathers expert analysis, data, and research on the evolving sanctions regime. Readers can review a chronological overview of major measures and Russian countermeasures by Date, Country, and Sector through the Sanctions Timeline. The Evidence Base section features the latest publications and research reports.

Discover recent expert media commentary from Torbjörn Becker and the Sanctions team under Media Highlights.

Rising oil prices could give Russia a financial advantage as the conflict around Iran disrupts global energy markets. In an NBC News article republished by EuropeSays, analysts examined how Vladimir Putin may benefit from higher energy revenues and reduced Western attention on Ukraine.  

Petras Katinas, research fellow in climate, energy, and defense at the Royal United Services Institute, explained that the impact depends on the conflict’s duration. He noted that a prolonged crisis could help Russia sell crude oil with a smaller sanctions-related discount, strengthening Moscow’s revenue position.  

The article also discussed the Strait of Hormuz, U.S. sanctions policy, Ukraine’s air defense needs, and Russia’s military spending. Experts warned that extra oil income could support Russia’s war effort while global attention shifts toward the Middle East.

To explore the full analysis and Petras Katinas’s commentary, read the complete article in NBC News, republished by EuropeSays.

For further context, explore the Sanctions on Russia & Russian Economic Retaliation section. It offers a sanctions timeline by date, country, and sector; an evidence base with recent research; and media highlights featuring expert commentary.

Further Reading: Middle East Crisis Could Strengthen Russia’s War Economy

In his recent RUSI analysis, Back to Square One: The EU’s Endless Energy Dependency Trap, Petras Katinas expanded on the risks highlighted in his NBC News media commentary. Katinas warned that renewed instability in the Middle East and potential disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz could deepen Europe’s energy vulnerability while indirectly strengthening Russia’s economic position. He explained that higher global oil and LNG prices could allow Moscow to generate additional export revenue despite ongoing Western sanctions.

The commentary also examined how Europe’s continued reliance on imported fossil fuels leaves the EU exposed to geopolitical shocks, supply chain disruptions, and price volatility. Petras Katinas argued that long-term European energy security depends on accelerating clean energy investment, expanding electrification, and reducing dependence on external suppliers. His analysis connects Russia sanctions, European energy security, and global market instability, showing how conflicts beyond Ukraine can still influence the Kremlin’s war economy and Europe’s strategic resilience.

Further Reading: Winners, Losers, and Vulnerabilities of the Hormuz Blockade

To continue exploring the geopolitical and economic risks surrounding global energy markets, readers can visit the FREE Network policy brief, The Hormuz Blockade: Winners, Losers, and Vulnerabilities. The analysis by Johan Gars, Daniel Spiro, and Henrik Wachtmeister examines how a potential blockade of the Strait of Hormuz could reshape global trade flows, energy prices, and sanctions dynamics.

The brief highlights that while major oil-importing economies in Europe and Asia would face severe economic pressure, countries such as Russia could benefit from higher global oil prices and increased demand for alternative energy suppliers. The policy brief also discusses the broader implications for inflation, energy security, and international policy coordination, offering valuable insight into how tensions in the Middle East can influence Russia’s war economy and the effectiveness of Western sanctions.

Sweden’s tougher approach to Russia’s shadow fleet is beginning to show results in the Baltic Sea. In a recent Focus Online article, published in cooperation with Tagesspiegel, journalist Maxi Beigang examined Sweden’s new legal tools and coast guard operations targeting suspicious tankers near Swedish waters. The article places these actions in the wider context of sanctions enforcement, maritime security, and Russia’s wartime oil exports.

Henrik Wachtmeister, researcher at Uppsala University, offered expert insight into the economic role of Russia’s shadow fleet. He explained that the fleet remains vital for Moscow because it helps move Russian goods, especially oil, despite Western restrictions. However, Wachtmeister noted that these services are costly. Higher transport fees force Russia to sell oil at a discount, limiting the revenue available to fund its war economy.

The article also highlights Sweden’s recent enforcement actions around Trelleborg and Ystad. According to Focus Online, the Swedish Coast Guard boarded or detained several ships suspected of violating maritime safety rules or environmental regulations. These measures may not stop Russian exports entirely, but Henrik Wachtmeister said they can make transport more expensive and increase uncertainty for shadow fleet operators.

A wider policy question remains: how far can Sweden go without triggering escalation from Moscow? The article notes that Russia has already framed such enforcement as provocative. Wachtmeister warned that boarding Russian-flagged ships would carry a higher political and military risk. This makes Sweden’s strategy important, but also sensitive. It can raise costs for Russia while testing the limits of maritime enforcement in the Baltic Sea.

To explore the full analysis and Henrik Wachtmeister’s commentary, read the complete article in Focus Online.

Europe’s energy security remains vulnerable despite major efforts to reduce dependence on Russian fossil fuels. In a recent Pulse Energy article, based on analysis from RUSI, Petras Katinas examined how disruption in the Strait of Hormuz has exposed the EU’s continuing reliance on imported energy. The article argues that diversification alone cannot remove Europe’s structural exposure to global energy shocks.

Petras Katinas, Research Fellow in Climate, Energy and Defence at the Royal United Services Institute, explained that the EU’s energy challenge has shifted but not disappeared. After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Europe moved away from Russian pipeline gas and expanded alternative supply routes. Yet Katinas noted that global oil and liquefied natural gas markets remain exposed to geopolitical chokepoints, including the Strait of Hormuz.

The article highlights how rising tensions involving the United States, Israel, and Iran have brought traditional supply risks back into focus. Around one-fifth of global oil and LNG shipments pass through the Strait of Hormuz, making it one of the world’s most important energy routes. According to the analysis, Europe may face limited physical shortages in the short term, but price volatility remains a serious risk for consumers, industry, and governments.

Petras Katinas also emphasized the importance of domestic clean energy and electrification. The article argues that Europe’s long-term energy security depends on reducing exposure to imported hydrocarbons. Electrification can support this goal by shifting demand toward electricity generated from European sources. However, Katinas also warned that this transition brings new risks, including dependence on critical minerals and greater vulnerability to cyberattacks.

The wider discussion connects energy policy with European security, sanctions, and strategic resilience. The EU’s REPowerEU agenda helped reduce reliance on Russian fossil fuels, but the current crisis shows that supply diversification is not enough. Strategic reserves can ease short-term pressure, while long-term security requires investment, infrastructure protection, and coordinated policy choices. For Europe, energy independence remains both an economic priority and a security challenge.

To explore the full analysis and Petras Katinas’s commentary, read the complete article in Pulse Energy and the original RUSI commentary.

Further Reading: Sanctions Portal

For further expert analysis on sanctions, energy flows, and economic pressure, visit the portal’s recent publications in the Evidence Base. Learn more about sanctions against Russia and Russian economic retaliation by visiting the Sanctions Timeline, which tracks measures by date, country, and sector. See the latest media commentary from Petras Katinas and other experts in Media Highlights.

Policy Paper: the Hormuz Blockade

The most recent policy paper published on the FREE NETWORK presents calculations and modeling of how oil producers and consumers in selected countries may be affected by the de facto blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. The authors study two scenarios:

• one where strategic inventories cushion the effects
• and one where inventories have run out.

Russia profits substantially, equivalent to 6-11% of GDP, driven by higher global oil prices and a potential reduction in the sanctions-induced discount on Russian oil. Net oil importers lose, most substantially India, to some extent China, and to a lesser extent Europe. Within Europe, most countries lose, with the exception of Norway and possibly Estonia. Gulf countries generally lose since they cannot export their oil. Surprisingly, Saudi Arabia can make a net profit by earning high prices for oil redirected to its western ports.