Boycott of Russia and Belarus
Since early 2022, Russia and Belarus have been boycotted by many companies and organizations in Europe, North America, Australasia, and elsewhere, in response to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, which is supported by Belarus. As of 2 July 2022, the Yale School of Management recorded more than 1,000 companies withdrawing or divesting themselves from Russia, either as a result of sanctions or in protest of Russian actions.[1] Ukrainian National Agency on Corruption Prevention maintains a list called International Sponsors of War that includes companies and individuals still doing business with Russia.[2]
Overview
The majority of countries which sanctioned Russia following its 2014 annexation of Crimea began imposing additional sanctions to punish Russia for invading all of Ukraine — a move for which Russian President Vladimir Putin had long prepared.[3] Many companies were not impacted by sanctions against Russia but ruled in favor of cutting ties with the country either due to the public pressure or in protest of the Russian government's actions, or both.[4][5] Ukrainian institutions have stated that the need for these measures is urgent.[6]
The response can be broadly divided into a "cultural boycott", aimed at amplifying the international condemnation of the invasion, and an "economic boycott", which is designed to make the war effort less sustainable.[7][8] As a result of the latter, several commentators have warned of an unprecedented economic collapse in Russia's future, citing a 30% drop in the ruble's value, a 20% rise in interest rates and a 1% GDP expansion down from 1.7%.[9] Analyses by multiple firms project year end GDP contraction of at least 5% and inflation of 15%.[10] Some of the most critical blows to Russian infrastructure have been the loss of access to the SWIFT payment system and limitations on Russia's ability to export oil.[11] US Senator Bernie Sanders has stated that this crisis should influence energy policy more broadly in order to deter "authoritarian petrostates".[12] While Shell plc has been noted for relinquishing its stake in Gazprom, it was also criticised for buying a cargo of discounted Russian crude oil.[13] The next day, following public outcry, Shell defended the purchase as a short term necessity, but also announced that it intends to reduce such purchases and put the profits from them into a fund that will go towards humanitarian aid to Ukraine.[14] As of 10 March, half of the ten largest international companies with business ties to Russia announced that they are withdrawing or closing their operations; and the number of companies that have done so is over 300.[15]
Some of the largest snack and fast food companies have faced criticism for continuing to do business in Russia and Belarus.[16][17][18][19][20] Anthony Pompliano has defended cryptocurrency trading platforms for not participating in the boycott, stating "there is an incredible amount of inhumanity that goes into the decision to cut off the average citizen from the global financial system. What was their crime?"[21] Critics of the Israeli government have pointed out that several American politicians who support isolating Russia economically previously campaigned for and passed anti-BDS laws punishing boycotts of Israel.[22][23][24]
The cultural side of the boycott has focused on reducing the number of entertainment products available to people in Russia. These include films and albums but also live televised events that are hosted in Western countries.[25] Yasmeen Serhan has commented that nationalistic sentiment, which has historically benefited Putin's regime, will be undermined by Russia's exclusion from sporting events.[8] The banning of Russia and Belarus from the Olympics has drawn comparisons to the athletic boycott of apartheid South Africa. According to Olympic historians David Wallechinsky and Bill Mallon, the decision can be considered a turning point when compared to past leniency over the state-sponsored doping programme in Russia or the attempted abduction of Krystsina Tsimanouskaya by Belarus.[26][27]
In addition to cancelling planned appearances in Russia, several entertainment organisations with Russian members began to scrutinise their past support for Putin. Some of these celebrities refused to condemn the war but others lost their contracts because they did so without mentioning Putin by name. A statement by Alex Ovechkin, for example, called for peace in general and mentioned that his family members in Russia were also in danger.[28] However, Czech former Detroit Red Wings and Ottawa Senators goaltender Dominik Hašek responded to Ovechkin and criticized him for his past support of Putin, stating "What!? Not only an alibist, a chicken shit, but also a liar!", while also calling on the NHL to suspend all Russian players.[29] One musician who referred to his family's safety when condemning the war was Alexander Malofeev. The Vancouver Recital Society, which had begun requiring this of all Russian performers, responded that Malofeev's statement was not sufficient to allow his concert to go ahead.[30]
Despite ongoing sanctions, 47 of the world's biggest 200 companies still have not left Russia, particularly energy companies remain invested there. U.K. energy giant Shell and Japanese trading firms Mitsui and Mitsubishi hold double-digit stakes in the Sakhalin-2 oil and natural gas project. On July 1, 2022, Putin signed a decree to allow the government to seize the Sakhalin-2 oil and natural gas project but further attempts to formally nationalize the assets of international firms were paused when the bill did not make it through the State Duma before the 2022 summer recess. According to Western analysts, remaining companies have experienced expropriation and nationalization pressures, but officially Russia has denied that it is interested in such actions. In August 2022, Russia's trade and industry minister Denis Manturov stated, "we are not interested in the nationalization of enterprises or their removal.”[31][32]
Controversy
Criticism
Critics of the boycott and sanctions have predicted that they would not cause significant changes in the Russian government's policy. Patrick Cockburn argued that sanctions similar to those used against Iraq will cause widespread poverty and claim more lives than the use of military force.[531] Others have supported the cultural boycott but called for economic coercion to be narrowly targeted.[532][533] Some critics noted that the decision of major credit card companies to suspend their operations in Russia will affect any Russian who has taken out a credit card in their home country, including those who have protested against the war in Ukraine, who are trying to flee Russia or are now living abroad.[534][535]
Activists in Russia believe that amid lost access to financial and educational institutions, Putin will be better able to paint Western countries as the enemy.[536] Carnegie Moscow Center scholar Andrey Movchan wrote that sanctions aimed at ordinary Russians could be "exactly what the Kremlin wants – that tens of millions of Russians who oppose the regime will be unable to leave the country and even temporarily find themselves in a world free of Russian propaganda," stating that sanctions should instead "uncompromisingly block the Kremlin's access to its financial and technological resources."[537]
Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince stated that "if Cloudflare were to stop operating in Russia, the Russian government would celebrate us shutting down" because "indiscriminately terminating service would do little to harm the Russian government, but would both limit access to information outside the country, and make significantly more vulnerable those who have used us to shield themselves as they have criticized the government".[538]
Regarding the cultural boycott, Patrick West wrote that many parts had become a vehicle for Russophobia, notably an incident in which the University of Milano-Bicocca in Italy considered cancelling a course on Dostoyevski but ultimately did not.[539] A decision by the Cardiff Philharmonic Orchestra to cancel a planned performance of Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture was met with similar controversy.[540] One of the directors stated that continuing with the original concert would have been offensive due to the themes of Russian military pride and not simply because Tchaikovsky was Russian.[541] Discussing these issues, the communications coordinator for Diem25 expressed regret that Netflix was suspending its adaptation of Anna Karenina due to the involvement of a Russian production company.[542]
Some critics have argued that Western companies and sports organizations such as FIFA and the IOC have acted hypocritically by boycotting Russia but not the United States for the actions of the U.S. military during the Iraq War,[543] China for the persecution of Uyghurs in China,[544][545] or Qatar and Saudi Arabia for human rights violations and military intervention in Yemen.[546][547] Business professor Stanislav Markus has suggested that boycotts of Russia might expand to include more countries as the companies involved become increasingly comfortable with deglobalisation.[545]