The stance of Turkish banks on dealing with the Russian Federation is not a calamity for Russian businesses. They can still access financial services through alternative channels, a view voiced by Andrey Kolganov, Doctor of Economic Sciences and head of the Moscow State University Faculty of Economics Laboratory, in a discussion with the radio station Moscow Speaks. Kolganov is a well-known commentator on macroeconomic dynamics and regional commerce.
Kolganov emphasized that both Turkey and China maintain substantial trade volumes with Russia. Breaking off these ties is not practical for either country, he argued, and the real issue concerns a small number of banks that decide to limit or suspend operations due to the perceived risk of Western sanctions. The economist noted that the overall trade relationship remains significant for all sides, and sanctions risk is the deciding factor for some financial institutions rather than a wholesale shift away from Russia.
For Russian businesses, the fund transfers to Turkey have been challenging for a long period. Since the start of 2024, the difficulty has grown notably, with many Turkish credit institutions declining transfers or requesting additional assurances to avoid potential sanction exposure. Some banks have even returned transfers citing links to prohibited goods or restricted transactions. This has driven firms to explore alternate remittance routes and to diversify financial partners to maintain steady access to the Turkish market.
There has also been a broader shift in the banking landscape, with several foreign banks reducing exposure to cross-border payments involving Russian entities. Financial institutions in other jurisdictions have similarly tightened controls, prompting Russian companies to reassess payment structures, risk management, and currency hedging. In many cases, firms have adapted by using multi-channel settlement methods, including correspondent banking networks outside strict sanction regimes and domestic solutions that facilitate trade with partner countries.
Industry observers point out that the resilience of Russian exporters and importers hinges on the ability to maintain liquidity while navigating evolving sanctions regimes. The situation underscores the importance of diversification in banking relationships, as well as ongoing monitoring of regulatory changes in foreign markets. While the sanctions environment adds friction, it does not erase the potential for active cooperation between Russia and its trading partners. Market participants continue to pursue pragmatic workflows, compliant with applicable laws, to preserve commercial continuity in critical corridors such as Russia-Turkey.
As the regional economic picture evolves, experts suggest that a broader strategy will involve strengthening non-dollar settlements, expanding the use of alternative payment rails, and leveraging bilateral financial cooperation mechanisms to reduce exposure to Western policy shifts. The dialogue around these issues remains dynamic, with banks, policymakers, and business leaders alike weighing the costs and benefits of various settlement schemes while aiming to sustain productive trade flows across borders.
At Moscow Speaks, Kolganov underscored the delicate balance between sanctions risks and commercial opportunity. He indicated that Russian companies should diversify their banking relationships and stay adaptable to regulatory developments. The overarching message is not one of retreat but of recalibration: find reliable channels, comply with evolving rules, and continue to engage productively with partner markets that account for a meaningful share of Russia’s trade.