Thread by @JoshRudes

Solid Russia sanctions options by @AmbDanFried & @brianoftoole, who name 10 companies starting with Gazprom, Rosneft, & VTB.

I'd emphasize a point I learned from Dan & @offspring about escalatory options & activity buckets: You gotta keep 'em separated. 🧵atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atla…

Right now the Kremlin appears to be to be escalating against two victims at once: Ukraine and Navalny. In keeping his options open, Putin may be hoping he will have an opportunity to take out one victim and then avoid severe sanctions by backing down on the other.

The way to disabuse Putin of that notion is to clarify—together with credible signals from allies—that each Kremlin behavior will be treated separately as a standalone matter, and that the West has strong options ready to ratchet up sanctions in response to each situation.

One way to keep 'em separated is to focus Ukraine-related measures on macro sanctions (like Gazprom and Rosneft financing, blocking banks, sovereign debt) while reserving sanctions on oligarchs for Navalny (nicely comporting with Navalny's own recommended list of 35 individuals).

Key to making the oligarch sanctions hurt is to include companies with international ties. That might mean:

✅ Not just Abramovich, but also Evraz
✅ Not just Sergei Ivanov, but also Alrosa
✅ Not just Bogdanov, but also Surgutneftegas
✅ Not just Timchenko, but also Novatek

Blocking big interconnected companies can be risky business, as shown by the Deripaska-Rusal disaster. Dan & Brian are right to note spillover concerns for some supply chains—to be vetted for technical and diplomatic considerations—and argue that more risk tolerance is warranted.

What this piece shows well is that the US and it allies have solid options (enough to address multiple situations at once and separately) and the West needs to make clear it stands ready to deploy these tools if the Kremlin decides to, as @offspring would say, come out and play.