Author: Admin
New Report Examines Ukraine’s Strategic Communications in Africa
Ukraine has fundamentally transformed its engagement with Africa since Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, according to a new report from the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics (SITE). The study, Ukraine’s Strategic Communications in Africa: Actors, Narratives, and Lessons for Sweden, examines how Ukraine has shifted from a limited diplomatic presence to a more proactive communication strategy aimed at strengthening partnerships across the continent.
The report argues that Africa has become an increasingly important arena for diplomatic engagement, where support in multilateral institutions, cooperation on food security, and competition over public narratives have gained strategic significance. While the report is written with Sweden’s Africa policy in mind, its findings also offer broader lessons for governments seeking to strengthen engagement with African partners.
Ukraine Has Rebuilt Its Africa Strategy Since 2022
According to the report, Ukraine’s pre-2022 engagement with Africa was fragmented and lacked a coherent strategy. Diplomatic coverage remained limited, communication was largely reactive, and Russia maintained a far stronger institutional and media presence across the continent.
The full-scale invasion prompted a significant policy shift. Ukraine adopted its first dedicated Africa strategy, appointed a Special Representative for the Middle East and Africa, expanded its diplomatic network from 11 to 18 embassies, and introduced the Ukraine–African Countries Communication Strategy 2024–2026. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs also placed greater emphasis on proactive messaging, coordinated diplomacy, and locally relevant communication.
The report notes that high-level diplomatic engagement has also intensified. Between late 2022 and 2025, Ukrainian officials conducted multiple ministerial visits across the continent, while President Volodymyr Zelenskyy expanded contacts with African leaders and institutions.
Food Security and Local Partnerships Strengthen Ukraine’s Message
The report finds that communication efforts are most effective when they address issues that directly affect African societies rather than focusing primarily on European security concerns. Narratives linked to food security, economic cooperation, humanitarian assistance, and sovereignty have generated stronger engagement than messages centered exclusively on territorial integrity or geopolitical competition.
One of the strongest examples is the Grain from Ukraine initiative, which has delivered food assistance to more than 16 million people across Africa and the Middle East. According to the report, the initiative demonstrates how tangible humanitarian action can reinforce diplomatic messaging and build credibility with local audiences.
The authors also emphasize the growing role of Ukrainian civil society, academic institutions, diaspora organizations, and African research institutes in strengthening Ukraine’s presence across the continent. Partnerships with local journalists, universities, and policy organizations have proven particularly valuable because they enable African voices to communicate issues in locally relevant ways.
Strategic Communications Depend on Local Media and Trusted Voices
The report highlights Africa’s highly diverse media environment, arguing that successful communication requires country-specific approaches rather than uniform messaging.
While platforms such as Facebook, YouTube, X, and Telegram play important roles in different markets, traditional media continue to shape public opinion across much of the continent. Radio remains the most widely used news source in many African countries, while trusted local newspapers and broadcasters continue to enjoy greater public confidence than social media.
The report also argues that communication is most effective when delivered through respected African institutions, civil society organizations, and independent media rather than directly by foreign governments. This approach helps strengthen credibility while reducing perceptions of external influence.
Why It Matters
The report suggests that Ukraine’s experience demonstrates the importance of combining diplomacy, development cooperation, and strategic communications when engaging with African partners. Rather than responding primarily to disinformation, governments can achieve greater impact by focusing on long-term partnerships, locally relevant priorities, and evidence-based communication.
For Sweden and other Western countries, the authors recommend investing in trusted local media, strengthening relationships with African institutions, expanding local-language communication, and supporting independent journalism instead of relying mainly on government-led messaging.
The study concludes that durable influence depends less on countering competing narratives than on building credibility through sustained engagement, practical cooperation, and long-term institutional partnerships.
Conclusions
The SITE report presents Ukraine’s post-2022 engagement in Africa as a case study in strategic adaptation during wartime. By expanding diplomatic networks, investing in proactive communications, and emphasizing issues that resonate with African audiences, Ukraine has reshaped its approach to the continent.
Although written primarily to inform Swedish policymakers, the report offers broader insights into how democratic countries can strengthen international partnerships through credible communication, local cooperation, and sustained diplomatic engagement.
Ukraine Investment Guide 2026 Showcases $77.2 Billion in Investment Opportunities
Ukraine has unveiled its most comprehensive investment pipeline to date, presenting 377 investment opportunities worth $77.2 billion through the newly released Ukraine Investment Guide 2026. The guide was presented during the Ukraine Recovery Conference 2026 by the Ministry of Economy, Environment and Agriculture of Ukraine and the KSE Institute, with support from the Government of the United Kingdom.
The third edition of the guide is designed to connect international investors, financial institutions, development partners, and businesses with investment-ready projects across Ukraine’s priority sectors. According to the authors, approximately $61.6 billion in financing is still needed to implement the proposed projects.
Ukraine Investment Guide 2026 Highlights Investment Across 11 Key Sectors
The Ukraine Investment Guide 2026 features projects spanning 11 strategic sectors of the Ukrainian economy. These include energy, transport and logistics, agriculture, industry, critical materials, green metallurgy, defense and dual-use technologies, information technology, construction materials, healthcare, real estate, and housing.
The energy sector accounts for the largest share of investment opportunities, with 106 projects valued at $47.5 billion. The guide also identifies significant opportunities in digital technologies, transport infrastructure, green metallurgy, agriculture, critical minerals, and defense-related industries.
An important indicator of the guide’s practical value is the progress achieved since the previous edition. Around 40% of the projects included in the earlier guide have already secured financing or made substantial progress toward implementation, demonstrating growing investor interest despite the challenges of wartime conditions.
Supporting Ukraine’s Recovery Through Private Investment
The Ukraine Investment Guide serves as a practical tool to accelerate private-sector participation in Ukraine’s reconstruction and long-term economic development. Rather than focusing solely on recovery needs, the guide presents investment-ready projects with identified partners and financing requirements.
Moreover, the publication reflects Ukraine’s broader strategy of mobilizing private capital alongside international public support. By providing a structured overview of investment opportunities, it aims to reduce information barriers for investors while improving the visibility of Ukrainian companies and projects.
Prepared by the KSE Institute in cooperation with the Ministry of Economy, Environment and Agriculture of Ukraine, the guide was developed with contributions from international consulting firms and investment partners, including Deloitte, EY, KPMG, BDO, PwC, UkraineInvest, UVCA, and the Investment Support Office of the Ministry of Defence.
Supporting Recovery Through Private Investment
Ukraine’s recovery will require substantial private investment alongside international financial assistance. The Ukraine Investment Guide 2026 demonstrates that a significant pipeline of investment-ready projects is already available across strategic sectors that are essential for economic growth, infrastructure modernization, and industrial development.
By consolidating 377 projects worth $77.2 billion into a single investment resource, the guide provides investors with greater transparency while supporting Ukraine’s ambition to attract long-term international capital. The progress achieved by projects featured in previous editions also suggests that well-prepared investment opportunities can continue to move forward despite ongoing security challenges.
Conclusion
The launch of the Ukraine Investment Guide 2026 highlights the country’s continued focus on attracting investment as a cornerstone of economic recovery. With hundreds of projects spanning critical sectors and billions of dollars in investment potential, the guide provides a roadmap for businesses, financial institutions, and development partners seeking to participate in Ukraine’s reconstruction and future growth.
Suggested Reading
- Ukraine Recovery and Reconstruction by the KSE Institute
- FREE Network Policy Briefs on Ukraine’s Economic Recovery
- Ukraine Support Tracker by the Kiel Institute
TRACER Index Offers New Benchmark for Global Sanctions Compliance
A new analytical tool is providing policymakers with a more comprehensive way to evaluate sanctions enforcement. The TRACER Index, published by the Sanctions on Russia initiative, measures how effectively countries implement export restrictions while accounting for the structural factors that influence sanctions evasion risks.
Unlike traditional rankings that focus solely on trade outcomes, the TRACER Index separates a country’s institutional capacity from the external conditions that may affect sanctions compliance. As a result, it offers a more nuanced assessment of where enforcement systems perform well and where vulnerabilities remain.
How the TRACER Index Measures Sanctions Compliance
The TRACER Index evaluates 38 countries using 85 indicators organized into four complementary pillars. Together, these indicators measure both enforcement capacity and structural exposure to sanctions evasion.
The four pillars include:
- Legal Frameworks: assessing the strength and enforceability of sanctions legislation, judicial effectiveness, and legal penalties.
- Government Enforcement: measuring customs controls, financial oversight, anti-corruption systems, and regulatory enforcement.
- Corporate Compliance: evaluating the tools available to businesses and financial institutions for sanctions screening, due diligence, and reporting.
- Structural Constraints: capturing geographic, logistical, and economic factors that may increase the risk of sanctions circumvention regardless of institutional quality.
According to the project, separating these dimensions allows policymakers to distinguish between countries with weak enforcement institutions and those facing inherently higher risks because of their geographic location or trade structure.
A Diagnostic Tool for Better Policy
The developers describe TRACER as more than a country ranking. Instead, it serves as a diagnostic framework that helps governments identify specific strengths and weaknesses within their sanctions enforcement systems.
The index recognizes that observed trade outcomes alone cannot explain sanctions’ effectiveness. Trade diversion may occur because of institutional shortcomings, but it can also result from structural factors outside the immediate control of national authorities. By accounting for both, TRACER aims to provide a fairer comparison across countries.
Moreover, the framework helps policymakers prioritize reforms by identifying areas where improvements in legislation, enforcement capacity, corporate compliance, or institutional coordination could strengthen sanctions implementation.
Why It Matters
Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, sanctions enforcement has become increasingly important for limiting access to restricted goods and technologies. However, implementation varies across jurisdictions, and countries face different levels of exposure to sanctions evasion.
The TRACER Index provides an evidence-based approach for understanding these differences. By combining institutional indicators with structural risk factors, it offers governments, researchers, and compliance professionals a practical tool for evaluating sanctions effectiveness and identifying where additional policy attention may be needed.
As sanctions regimes continue to evolve, analytical frameworks such as TRACER may play an increasingly important role in supporting international coordination and improving enforcement outcomes.
Further Reading
- Evidence Base on Sanctions Against Russia
- FREE Network Policy Briefs on Sanctions
- International Trade and Sanctions Research by the KSE Institute
- Ukraine Support Tracker by the Kiel Institute
Russia’s Economy Reaches a Critical Stage, New Report Finds
Russia’s economy is entering a more fragile phase despite avoiding collapse since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, according to a new report by the Kiel Institute for the World Economy and the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics. The report argues that slowing growth, shrinking fiscal reserves, rising financial risks, and increasing dependence on China are reshaping Russia’s long-term economic outlook.
Russia’s Economy Faces Growing Structural Pressures
Four years after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the report titled “Endgame: The State of the Russian Economy” concludes that Russia’s economy has become increasingly vulnerable, even though it has avoided the dramatic collapse predicted early in the conflict.
The authors argue that headline economic indicators mask deeper structural weaknesses. Economic growth has slowed sharply, while the economy has become increasingly dependent on defense-related production. At the same time, civilian investment has stagnated, labor shortages have intensified, and trade volumes have fallen to their lowest level in more than a decade.
According to the report, Russia’s official 2026 growth forecast has been reduced to just 0.4%, with the economy contracting by 0.3% during the first quarter of 2026 despite a substantial increase in government spending. The authors also question whether official inflation and growth statistics fully reflect current economic conditions.
Russia’s Fiscal Buffers Continue to Shrink
One of the report’s central findings is the rapid depletion of Russia’s financial reserves. Before the war, Russia relied heavily on its National Wealth Fund to cushion economic shocks. However, liquid assets in the fund have fallen from 6.5% of GDP before the invasion to just 1.8% by April 2026, leaving far less fiscal flexibility. Meanwhile, Russia’s fiscal position has deteriorated rapidly.
The report notes that the first-quarter 2026 budget deficit exceeded the government’s full-year target, while oil and gas revenues declined sharply because of sanctions, lower export volumes, and damage to energy infrastructure. Although higher global oil prices have provided temporary relief, the authors argue that these gains are unlikely to offset deeper structural challenges.
In addition, the report highlights rising corporate debt, increasing pressure on banks, and continued reliance on high interest rates to contain inflation, creating significant macroeconomic tensions.
China’s Role In Russia’s Economy Continues To Expand
The report identifies China as Russia’s most important economic partner since Western sanctions were imposed. China now accounts for approximately 35% of Russia’s total foreign trade, compared with a much smaller share before the invasion. At the same time, Chinese suppliers have become increasingly important for machinery, electronics, industrial equipment, and dual-use technologies that support Russia’s manufacturing and defense sectors.
Researchers argue that this relationship is becoming increasingly asymmetric. Russia has become more dependent on China for trade, finance, and technology, while China has gained stronger bargaining power by purchasing Russian commodities at discounted prices and expanding its influence over strategic supply chains.
The report also notes that China supplies more than 60% of the critical military-related components reaching Russia, either directly or through intermediary trade networks.
Authors Call For Stronger Sanctions Enforcement
Rather than arguing that existing sanctions have failed, the report suggests that enforcement remains uneven. The authors contend that Russia’s ability to finance its war increasingly depends on export earnings from hydrocarbons. Consequently, they recommend tighter monitoring of sanctions, stronger action against the so-called shadow tanker fleet, expanded export controls, and broader use of secondary sanctions targeting companies that facilitate sanctions evasion.
The report also proposes that Europe consider introducing a Ukraine Support Tariff on remaining imports from Russia. According to the authors, such a measure could simultaneously reduce Russian export revenues while generating additional resources for Ukraine’s reconstruction.
Why It Matters
The report argues that Russia’s economy is entering a more constrained phase rather than facing an immediate collapse. Although military spending has supported economic activity, the authors contend that shrinking fiscal reserves, mounting financial pressures, labor shortages, and growing dependence on China could weaken Russia’s long-term economic resilience. They conclude that future developments will depend largely on export revenues, sanctions enforcement, and broader geopolitical dynamics.
According to the authors, Russia’s mounting economic weaknesses also create an opportunity for Western governments to strengthen the effectiveness of existing policy measures. The report identifies oil and gas export revenues as the main source of financing for Russia’s war effort and calls for stricter implementation and enforcement of current sanctions.
“Price cap enforcement must take center stage in sanctions policy. This includes renewed efforts to limit Russia‘s shadow fleet,” argues Torbjörn Becker, Director of the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics and co-author of the report.
For European policymakers, the findings reinforce the importance of sustained sanctions enforcement, coordinated export controls, and continued monitoring of Russia’s evolving economic position.
About the Report
The Kiel Report, “Endgame: The State of the Russian Economy,” brings together leading international experts on the Russian economy. The report includes the following contributions:
- Russia’s economic endgame, Torbjörn Becker and Moritz Schularick
- Why economists get the Russian economy “wrong” and how we can think about sanctions, Torbjörn Becker
- The limits on Russia’s war financing and the energy windfall, Matthew C. Klein
- The China-Russia asymmetric partnership: Implications for Europe, Alicia García-Herrero, Elina Ribakova, and Lucas Risinger
- China’s role in supplying Russia with sanctioned products, Konstantin Egorov
- Regional convergence in Russian regions during the war, Iikka Korhonen
Further Reading
- FREE Network Policy Briefs on Russia
- Economic Sanctions Research
- Ukraine Economy and Reconstruction
Carbon Tax Fairness Changes as Income Inequality Grows
A new study suggests that carbon tax fairness is not fixed. Instead, it changes as income inequality rises or falls. Researchers found that carbon and gasoline taxes become more regressive over time when income gaps widen, especially for everyday necessities such as transport fuel. The findings could help governments design fairer climate policies by pairing carbon taxes with targeted financial support where needed. The study was conducted by Julius J. Andersson of the Stockholm School of Economics and the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics, and Giles Atkinson of the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Why Carbon Tax Fairness Matters
Carbon taxes are widely viewed as one of the most effective ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. By making fossil fuels more expensive, they encourage households and businesses to switch to cleaner alternatives.
Yet carbon taxes have long faced criticism because they can place a larger financial burden on lower-income households. Fuel, heating, and electricity are basic necessities for many families, meaning poorer households often spend a larger share of their income on these essentials.
Until now, most studies have measured whether carbon taxes are progressive or regressive at a single point in time. The new research argues that this approach misses an important factor: income inequality itself changes over time. As societies become more unequal, the distributional impact of an existing tax can also change, even if the tax rate stays exactly the same.
How Rising Inequality Changes Carbon Tax Fairness
The researchers developed a simple economic model showing that two factors determine how fairly an indirect tax is distributed. The first is the level of income inequality across households. The second is how spending on a taxed product changes as income rises, known as the income elasticity of demand.
When the taxed product is a necessity, such as gasoline in high-income countries, rising income inequality causes the tax burden to become increasingly concentrated among lower-income households. In contrast, taxes on luxury goods become more progressive as inequality grows because wealthier households spend proportionally more on those items.
This means carbon tax fairness is dynamic rather than permanent. A tax introduced during a period of relatively equal incomes may become much less equitable decades later if inequality increases.
Sweden Offers a Natural Test Case
To test their theory, the researchers examined Sweden’s carbon tax on transport fuels between 1999 and 2012. Sweden introduced its carbon tax in 1991 and now has one of the world’s highest carbon tax rates. During the following decades, however, income inequality increased significantly, creating an opportunity to observe whether the tax became more regressive over time.
Using national household expenditure data, the researchers found a strong relationship between rising inequality and increasing regressivity. When tax burdens were measured against annual income, the carbon tax became steadily more regressive as income inequality increased. Statistical analysis showed an exceptionally strong negative correlation between the two measures.
The study also showed that the choice of welfare measure matters. When annual household expenditure was used instead of annual income, the same tax appeared much less regressive, and in several years even progressive. Because spending is more evenly distributed than income, this changes how the burden is measured.
Evidence Extends Beyond Sweden
The researchers also compared previous studies of gasoline taxes across several high-income countries. Countries with higher income inequality consistently showed more regressive gasoline taxes than countries with lower inequality.
The United States, which has comparatively high income inequality, showed some of the most regressive outcomes. Denmark and Sweden, with lower inequality during the study periods, showed much smaller distributional impacts.
This broader comparison suggests that differences between countries may be explained not only by fuel prices or tax rates, but also by differences in how income is distributed.
Key Research Findings
- Rising income inequality makes carbon and gasoline taxes on essential goods increasingly regressive over time.
- Sweden’s carbon tax became more regressive between 1999 and 2012 as income inequality increased.
- Measuring tax burdens using household expenditure instead of annual income makes carbon taxes appear considerably less regressive.
- Cross-country evidence shows that higher-income inequality is strongly associated with more regressive gasoline taxes across developed economies.
- The researchers’ theoretical model helps explain why previous studies have reported different results across countries, time periods, and measurement methods.
What the Findings Mean for Climate Policy
The study has important implications for governments planning long-term climate policies.
Carbon taxes remain one of the most efficient tools for reducing emissions. However, policymakers should recognise that carbon tax fairness can change over time even when the tax itself remains unchanged.
As income inequality grows, governments may need to strengthen complementary policies such as lump-sum rebates, carbon dividends, targeted transfers, or reductions in other taxes. These measures could help preserve both fairness and public support for climate action.
The findings also suggest that distributional analyses should be updated regularly rather than treated as permanent assessments made only when a tax is introduced. Monitoring changes in inequality could become just as important as monitoring emissions reductions when evaluating climate policy.
Read the Full Research
Read the complete study, “Tax Progressivity of Carbon and Gasoline Taxes: The Role of Income Inequality,” published in Environmental and Resource Economics (2026), to explore the full theoretical model, Swedish case study, and international comparisons.
Meet the Researchers
- Assistant Professor Julius Andersson — Stockholm School of Economics; Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics, Sweden.
- Professor Giles Atkinson — Department of Geography and Environment; Grantham Research Institute for Climate Change and the Environment; Global School of Sustainability, London School of Economics and Political Science, United Kingdom.
Further Reading
Readers interested in the broader implications of this research are encouraged to explore the policy briefs published by the FREE Network.
- Carbon Tax Regressivity and Income Inequality
- Income Polarization and Climate Policy Backlash
- Revisiting the Impact of Rising Gasoline Prices on Swedish Households
- Road Congestion Pricing with A Public Transport Cashback Mechanism
- Navigating Environmental Policy Consistency Amidst Political Change
These publications examine a wide range of topics related to environmental economics, climate policy, carbon pricing, taxation, and public policy, translating academic research into accessible, evidence-based analysis for policymakers and the general public.
Torbjörn Becker: EU Loan Counterbalance Rising Russian Oil Revenues
Despite continuing revenue from oil sales bolstering Russia’s war economy, the European Union’s recently approved financial support for Ukraine could help balance economic power, Torbjörn Becker told Corren. The analysis highlights how a €90 billion EU loan package may offset the advantage Vladimir Putin gains from high oil prices and sales abroad.
The article in Corren explains that EU member states agreed to unblock a major financial aid package for Kyiv after political deadlock over pipeline deliveries and vetoes from Hungary and Slovakia. Two-thirds of the €90 billion support is earmarked for military equipment and defense needs, while the remaining funds are meant to stabilize Ukraine’s state budget. Torbjörn Becker, Director of the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics (SITE), described the loan as “completely necessary” for Ukraine to both manage fiscal pressures and sustain its defense capacity.
Becker highlighted that without such backing, Russia’s surging oil income, which has nearly doubled due to higher global prices, would leave Ukraine at a stark economic and strategic disadvantage. He noted that while Ukraine’s dependence on U.S. support has lessened, continued fiscal and military backing from the EU is critical, especially as Kyiv must use much of the loan funds to procure equipment, primarily from U.S. suppliers.
In context, the EU’s decision to proceed with the €90 billion loan package came after long negotiations over whether to leverage frozen Russian central bank assets. Ultimately, EU leaders opted to finance the support by tapping joint borrowing capacity rather than directly using immobilized Russian funds, a compromise that ensured timely deliveries and circumvented political hurdles.
To read the full article featuring Torbjörn Becker’s perspective on how the EU’s financial strategy may counterbalance Russian oil revenue gains, visit Corren’s original report.
Further Reading: In-Depth Analysis of Russia Sanctions and the Ukraine War Economy
For deeper context on the Ukraine war economy and sanctions impacts, explore our Sanctions on Russia & Russian Economic Retaliation portal:
- Sanctions timeline: chronological overview of major sanction packages and Russian countermeasures
- Evidence base: latest publications and research reports
- Media highlights: expert commentary on current developments
This hub gathers insights, data, and expert analysis on how sanctions shape the conflict’s economic dynamics.
Further Reading: Inside Russia’s Wartime Economy
For deeper insight into Russia’s economic outlook and the impact of sanctions, explore SITE’s report, “Financing the Russian War Economy.” This report examines Russia’s fiscal pressures, wartime financing strategies, and long-term growth risks under sustained sanctions.
The report expands on the themes highlighted by Torbjörn Becker and provides data-driven insight into the sustainability of Russia’s wartime economy, offering essential context for policymakers, researchers, and journalists.
Yulia Pavytska on Russia’s Economic Outlook Under Sanctions
A recent report published by EuropeSays examined the growing challenges surrounding Russia’s economy as Western sanctions continue to reshape global trade and financial relations. The article explored how Moscow has adapted to economic restrictions while maintaining key sectors tied to energy exports, industrial production, and wartime financing. Against the backdrop of prolonged geopolitical tensions, the discussion focused on whether current sanctions are producing the intended long-term economic impact.
Among the experts featured in the coverage was Yuliia Pavytska, whose analysis highlighted the structural adjustments Russia has made since the start of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Pavytska emphasized that sanctions have created significant pressure on Russia’s economy, especially in technology imports, investment flows, and access to international markets. At the same time, she noted that Russia has continued to seek alternative trade channels and financial mechanisms to reduce the immediate impact of Western restrictions. Her commentary underscored the importance of coordinated international enforcement and the closing of sanctions loopholes.
The EuropeSays article also examined broader economic and political implications tied to sanctions policy. It discussed how energy revenues, trade relations with non-Western partners, and state-backed industrial policies have helped Russia stabilize parts of its economy despite growing isolation from Western markets. The report further explored the challenges facing European policymakers as they balance economic pressure with long-term geopolitical objectives. Questions surrounding enforcement, secondary sanctions, and the future of international coordination remained central themes throughout the discussion.
Yulia Pavytska’s expert analysis added important context to the debate on sanctions effectiveness and Russia’s evolving economic outlook. Her insights contributed to a broader understanding of how economic policy tools influence both domestic resilience and international relations during prolonged conflict. To read the full article and explore the complete discussion, visit the original feature on EuropeSays.
Further Reading: Sanctions Hub of Excellence
For deeper expert analysis on sanctions policy and Russia’s economic adaptation, visit the KSE Sanctions Hub of Excellence. The platform brings together research, policy tracking, and expert commentary focused on sanctions enforcement, economic resilience, and global policy responses to Russia’s war against Ukraine. Explore the latest insights, analytical tools, and international research initiatives.
Further Reading: Sanctions Policy and Russian Economic Retaliation
For deeper context on the Ukraine war economy and sanctions impacts, explore our Sanctions on Russia & Russian Economic Retaliation portal:
- Sanctions timeline: chronological overview of major sanction packages and Russian countermeasures
- Evidence base: latest publications and research reports
- Media highlights: expert commentary on current developments
This hub gathers insights, data, and expert analysis on how sanctions shape the conflict’s economic dynamics.
Torbjörn Becker: EU’s Increased Russian Gas Imports Shift Balance
Despite longstanding goals to reduce dependency on Russian energy, the European Union has increased its imports of Russian liquefied natural gas in early 2026, potentially strengthening Moscow’s economic position, Torbjörn Becker told EFN. The trend highlights the complex energy dynamics affecting Europe’s strategic and economic calculations amid geopolitical pressures.
The EFN report highlights that EU nations imported roughly 5 million tonnes of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the Yamal facility in Siberia during the first quarter of 2026, marking a 17 % increase compared to the same period last year. These imports translate into billions of euros flowing into the Russian state, even as sanctions and diversification efforts continue.
“Right now the balance has shifted in Russia’s favor,” said Torbjörn Becker, Director of the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics (SITE) and an expert on Russian economic and geopolitical affairs. He explained that increased LNG purchases generate billions of dollars in revenue for the Russian state budget. These funds can support both its domestic economy and military activities. Becker noted that this shift complicates the energy sanctions landscape and calls into question how Europe will balance energy needs with geopolitical strategy.
Experts across Europe remain divided on what rising imports mean for policy. While the EU’s overarching REPowerEU strategy aims to phase out Russian fossil fuel imports by 2027 and enhance energy independence, actual trade data show that Russian LNG remains a significant component of European energy portfolios. In some member states, imports have grown despite broader ambitions to diversify supply and cut ties with Moscow.
To read the full EFN coverage and Torbjörn Becker’s commentary on how increasing Russian gas imports may shift energy and economic balances, see the original article on EFN.se.
Further Reading: In-Depth Analysis on Russia Sanctions and the Ukraine War Economy
For deeper context on Russia’s wartime economy and the impact of sanctions and energy trade patterns, explore our Sanctions on Russia & Russian Economic Retaliation portal:
- Sanctions timeline: A chronological overview of major sanction packages and Russian countermeasures
- Evidence base: Latest research and publications
- Media highlights: Expert commentary on current developments
This hub provides critical insights, data, and expert analysis on how sanctions and energy strategies shape the conflict’s economic dynamics.
Kyiv School of Economics: Ukraine Drones Disrupt Russia’s Oil Revenues
Ukrainian drone strikes are increasingly undermining Russia’s ability to capitalize on high global oil prices. In a recent Financial Times article, analysts examined how repeated attacks on key Baltic export terminals, including Primorsk and Ust-Luga, are disrupting flows and cutting into Moscow’s energy windfall. The report highlights how these strikes are exposing weaknesses in Russia’s infrastructure and defense systems amid a prolonged war.
Borys Dodonov, Head of Energy and Climate Studies at the Kyiv School of Economics, estimated that the attacks cost Russian energy exporters roughly $970 million in just one week. Dodonov’s analysis underscores the growing economic impact of Ukraine’s drone campaign, showing how targeted disruptions can directly reduce Russia’s export revenues despite elevated oil prices.
The Financial Times article also explored the broader implications for global markets and regional security. It noted sharp declines in naphtha exports from Ust-Luga and rising concerns over supply disruptions. The article further described how Russian companies are increasingly forced to fund their own anti-drone defenses, revealing systemic gaps in state protection and adding pressure on the domestic industry.
Learn more about how Ukraine’s drones dent Russia’s war-fuelled oil windfall in the FT article.
Further Reading: Russian Oil Tracker
The Russian Oil Tracker, a monthly report by the KSE Institute, monitors Russia’s oil exports, revenues, and the effectiveness of international sanctions. It combines data on export volumes, prices, shipping activity, and the use of “shadow fleet” tankers to estimate how much revenue Russia earns from oil and how sanctions impact its war financing. The tracker also evaluates compliance with policies such as the G7 price cap and highlights enforcement gaps, market trends, and key buyers like India and China. By providing monthly, data-driven insights, it serves as a key tool for policymakers and analysts assessing the real economic impact of sanctions on Russia’s energy sector.
Read the latest Russian Oil Tracker: “Export volumes and revenues collapse in February; as war in Iran drives oil prices”.
Sweden Supports Ukraine with a Record Aid Pledge
Sweden supports Ukraine with €10.7 billion in aid, marking the largest pledge to another country in modern Swedish history. Four years after Russia’s full-scale invasion, Swedish political, military, and economic leaders met at Kulturhuset in Stockholm on February 16, 2026. Their message was clear: backing Ukraine strengthens Sweden’s own security and Europe’s stability.
Torbjörn Becker, Director of the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics (SITE), joined senior officials to discuss how military innovation and economic endurance shape the war and might impact its outcome. As Sweden’s support for Ukraine continues, attention is shifting to both battlefield technology and financial resilience.
Technology Transforming Ukraine’s Front Lines
The war has evolved at a remarkable speed. Sweden’s Minister for Defence, Pål Jonson, described a battlefield defined by drones, satellites, and electronic warfare. As a result, troops can no longer hide easily. Innovation cycles that once took years now unfold within months.
Vice Admiral Eva Skoog Haslum warned that the front lines remain extremely dangerous. She described parts of the battlefield as “kill zones,” where constant surveillance and precision strikes limit movement. Meanwhile, Ukraine has weakened Russia’s naval presence in the Black Sea by using smaller, flexible systems instead of traditional large warships.
Swedish military equipment has played a significant role. The CV90 combat vehicle and Archer artillery system have performed effectively in combat. Designed for harsh northern conditions and to counter Russian systems, they have proven highly relevant in Ukraine.
Economic Pressure and Long-Term Advantage
Although military developments matter, economic endurance may decide the war. Becker emphasized that while Russia’s economy is much larger than Ukraine’s, the combined economic power of the EU and the United States far outweighs Russia.
“Russia’s economy is roughly ten times the size of Ukraine’s. But compared to the EU and the United States together, it is closer to 1 to 20. If political support holds, the resources are there to sustain Ukraine over time,” Becker explained.
Russia depends heavily on oil revenues. Therefore, when oil prices fall or sanctions tighten, state income drops. At the same time, Russia relies increasingly on China for advanced technology components. According to Becker, this dependence creates long-term vulnerability.
Interest rates in Russia have climbed to around 20–25 percent. Such high rates strain banks and businesses. Over time, financial instability could weaken Russia’s ability to finance the war.
Planning for Ukraine’s Economic Recovery
Ukraine also faces serious fiscal challenges. The country spends more than half of its state budget on defense. Public debt now exceeds 100 percent of GDP. As a result, debt restructuring will likely be necessary.
Becker pointed to roughly USD 300 billion in frozen Russian central bank reserves held abroad. Using these funds could provide a stronger financial foundation for rebuilding Ukraine. “The main obstacle is not technical or legal,” Becker said. “It is about political coordination and will.”
As Sweden’s support for Ukraine continues, European leaders are rethinking both defense strategy and economic resilience. The lessons learned from this war will likely shape European security policy for years to come.
Key Conclusions on Sweden’s Support for Ukraine
- Russia’s war economy faces mounting pressure from high interest rates and shrinking reserves.
- Western economic strength gives Ukraine a structural long-term advantage.
- Oil revenues remain central to Russia’s fiscal stability.
- Frozen Russian central bank assets could help fund Ukraine’s reconstruction.
Further Reading on Sanctions Against Russia and Economic Pressure
Energy exports remain the backbone of Russia’s economy and a tool of geopolitical leverage. Sanctions targeting this sector aim to reduce state revenue and limit Moscow’s influence abroad.
Visit the Sanctions Portal Evidence Base to explore research on energy sanctions against Russia. You can also review the Timeline of Western Sanctions and Russian Countermeasures to see how both sides have adapted since the full-scale invasion.
Explore SITE’s research articles, policy briefs, datasets, reports, and additional publications on the SITE website, and subscribe to the newsletter to stay informed about important updates.