The paper explores the ethical and practical implications of medical sanctions imposed on Russia. Since 2022, the U.S., EU, and other members of the sanctioning coalition have restricted exports of medical supplies and devices to “undermine Russia’s military capacity”. While these sanctions aim to pressure Russia, they raise complex ethical concerns regarding the right to healthcare. The author argues that while economic sanctions can impact citizens without direct harm, medical sanctions pose more severe risks by impeding civilians’ access to essential healthcare and affecting soldiers’ battlefield recovery.
The study describes the immediate and long-term effects of these sanctions, particularly their impact on Russia’s healthcare system and medical supply chains. Many of the initial disruptions stemmed not from outright bans but from indirect effects, such as logistical challenges, payment issues, and hesitancy among foreign suppliers, which affected deliveries and maintenance even before formal restrictions expanded in mid-2023. Although Western governments justified the inclusion of medical items in sanctions as a means of degrading Russia’s military capabilities, evidence suggests that the primary burden has fallen on civilians. Shortages of essential medications, problems with medical device maintenance, and a sharp decline in foreign-sponsored clinical trials have significantly altered healthcare access in Russia. While the government initially downplayed these issues, by late 2023, authorities acknowledged difficulties in acquiring antibiotics, cancer treatments, and insulin, as well as complications in surgical procedures due to unreliable imports of necessary equipment.
Despite those effects, the sanctions have done little to critically impair Russia’s military. The expectation that limiting medical exports would degrade battlefield medicine has proven difficult to verify. Although reports indicate that shortages of trauma equipment and hemostatic agents have delayed treatment for wounded soldiers, the extent of this impact remains uncertain. Russia has adapted by sourcing supplies from alternative providers, particularly China, though quality concerns persist. The study highlights a key dilemma: medical sanctions, unlike financial or trade restrictions, do not decisively undermine military capabilities but do pose significant humanitarian risks.
The paper ultimately argues that medical sanctions occupy a precarious position in modern conflict strategy. While they contribute to economic strain, they risk violating fundamental healthcare rights without delivering clear military advantages. As sanctions regimes continue to evolve, the study suggests that policymakers should reconsider the inclusion of medical products, ensuring that the pursuit of strategic objectives does not come at the expense of civilian well-being.
Read the full article.
