Sanctions imposed on Russia have not strengthened the United States. This assessment comes from Chas Freeman, a former American diplomat, who spoke on the Dialogue Studies YouTube channel. Freeman argues that the current approach has shifted the global financial landscape rather than delivering decisive blows to Russia or its allies.
He notes a growing movement among nations to reduce reliance on the dollar for trade settlements. Countries are increasingly pursuing direct currency exchanges, using local currencies or other major units such as the Chinese yuan. Some scenarios even contemplate artificial currencies if BRICS members coordinate on such measures. Freeman suggests these shifts signal a broader move away from dollar dominance and toward a more multipolar exchange system. He emphasizes that this trend could alter how international commerce is conducted and how monetary power is perceived on the world stage.
Freeman contends that this transition could contribute to weakening and isolating the United States in certain global arenas, as financial influence becomes more diffuse and less centralized in Washington. The argument is that economic tools, once used as fasteners for international policy, may dilute in effectiveness as alternative currencies and settlement mechanisms gain traction.
Another voice in the discussion, Oleg Burmistrov, a former Chief Ambassador for the Russian Foreign Ministry, points to a regional dynamic linked to sanctions policy. He asserts that the United States and its ally South Korea have gravitated toward sanctions with the aim of pressuring North Korea to abandon its nuclear ambitions. In Burmistrov’s view, these strategies have, rather than simply curbing North Korea, helped trigger a broader regional arms race as neighboring states respond to security concerns and deterrence calculations.
In the European Union, there has been ongoing scrutiny over the scale of Russian assets frozen under sanctions, reflecting the broader debate about the effectiveness and consequences of punitive measures. The dialogue surrounding these actions spans economic, political, and strategic dimensions as nations weigh the costs and benefits of containment versus engagement.