Experts are weighing the economic pressure tactics available to the U.S. administration—including export controls and financial restrictions—that could help bring an end to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Three years into its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia has failed to achieve significant battlefield gains. Meanwhile, its economy continues to weaken under the strain of war.

While Ukraine’s economy has shown remarkable resilience in the face of extreme adversity, Russia faces rising inflation, depleting financial reserves, and severe shortages of critical wartime resources—including ammunition and manpower. These deficits have forced the Kremlin to turn to Iran and North Korea for military aid.

Against this backdrop, President Donald Trump has signaled his willingness to ramp up economic pressure on Russia should the Kremlin refuse to end the war.

The West’s approach to the conflict will largely depend on its assessment of Russia’s economic endurance. Some argue that Moscow can sustain its war effort indefinitely, meaning Kyiv would ultimately have to accept a negotiated settlement on Russia’s terms—an outcome that would be tantamount to a Russian victory.

However, a growing number of experts believe Russia’s economy is rapidly deteriorating and that the U.S. and its allies should tighten sanctions and enforce stricter compliance—particularly targeting Russian energy exports and metals—to pressure Putin into seeking peace. This scenario, they argue, would be the most favorable for Ukraine, the U.S., and the broader Western alliance.

Regardless of the differing perspectives, there is near-universal agreement that increasing economic pressure will weaken Russia’s war machine and bring closer the day when, as some have put it, “the guns fall silent.”

The Hudson Institute, a Washington-based think tank, recently convened experts to discuss potential strategies for intensifying economic pressure on Moscow.

Their consensus? The U.S. must take more aggressive measures to cut off Russia’s access to resources critical for sustaining its war effort.

Former U.S. Under Secretary of State, James Glassman argued that now is the time to double down on efforts to force Russia to the negotiating table.

“The new U.S. administration must continue supplying Ukraine with weapons,” Glassman said. “But even more importantly, it must focus on economic pressure—especially in areas where sanctions have yet to be imposed.”

One key vulnerability, according to Glassman, is Russia’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports to Europe, particularly Germany.

“Last year, Russian LNG shipments to Europe increased by 20% compared to the previous year,” he noted. “This must be stopped immediately and replaced with American LNG.”

Many observers question the effectiveness of sanctions, often citing Moscow’s claims that the Russian economy is weathering Western pressure.

Charles King Mallory, a senior defense and international affairs researcher at the RAND Corporation, explained that this skepticism stems from two factors: the time lag in sanctions’ impact and Russia’s ability to manipulate public perception.

“Experts assessing the effectiveness of sanctions on Russia hold differing views, but even the most pessimistic among them acknowledge that sanctions have had a significant impact,” Mallory noted.

However, he warned that the effectiveness of even the most comprehensive sanctions is often undermined by "black knights"—nations that continue to trade with the sanctioned country.

“In Russia’s case, China and India have played this role by purchasing large quantities of Russian oil. The U.S. and its allies must be prepared to target intermediaries who facilitate sanctions evasion. That means seizing shipments, imposing fines, and enforcing public auctions of confiscated goods to maintain a real deterrent effect.”

Another concern is Russia’s continued economic footprint in Europe, particularly in the steel and metallurgy industries.

One significant oversight, Mallory argued, was allowing Russia’s creation of a shadow tanker fleet, which has helped Moscow continue oil exports despite Western restrictions.

“This could have been prevented early on by limiting tanker insurance to specific Western-controlled firms and requiring ship inspections and repairs at Western-supervised docks,” he explained.

Another growing concern is Russia’s use of gold to circumvent trade restrictions.

“Gold transactions pose a serious challenge to the enforcement of trade bans,” Mallory warned. “However, well-established countermeasures exist, including direct bans on sanctioned nations exporting gold and restrictions on listing certain types of gold on global markets.”

James Glassman is skeptical that diplomatic efforts to persuade Saudi Arabia to increase oil output would be necessary.

“If the U.S. cuts off Russian LNG and pressures Turkey to exclude Russian gas from the TurkStream pipeline, that alone could send the Kremlin into panic mode,” he asserted.

Mallory, however, believes that securing cooperation from OPEC allies remains a viable option.

“We’ve seen before how low oil prices helped bring down the Soviet Union, effectively bankrupting its oil sector,” he recalled.

“Today, driving down global oil prices remains the most effective strategy for crippling Russia’s economy,” Mallory argued.