On February 24th, 2022, Russian forces invaded Ukraine in what has been deemed one of the largest European military troop mobilizations since WWII. The onset of this violent armed conflict has caused one of the worst humanitarian and refugee crises of all time, as more than three million civilians have already fled Ukraine. Russian-Ukrainian relations have been fraught ever since 2014 when Ukrainian civil protests (the Revolution of Dignity/Maidan Revolution) ousted President Viktor Yanukovych.

In December of 2021, the Putin administration communicated with NATO and the U.S., expressing its objections to Ukraine joining NATO. Because Ukraine has yet to join NATO, the Biden administration has not supplied the Ukrainian resistance with troops on the ground. Instead, the U.S., Canada, and 19 European countries have provided the Ukrainian government with military commodities and humanitarian aid. While the death toll is difficult to accurately gauge, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights stated that 902 civilians had been killed and 1,459 had been wounded due to the war in Ukraine.

However, that statement was made on March 20th, before the discovery of the Bucha killings. In the first week of April, the discovery of mass graves in Bucha, Ukraine traumatized local Ukrainians, as authorities report that over 300 civilians were found dead. A mass grave in Bucha was discovered by locals, and the Earth observation company Maxar Technologies released photos of dead bodies along the streets of Bucha. On April 4th, President Biden responded to the Bucha killings by stating: “You saw what happened in Bucha, this warrants him — he is a war criminal.” Biden’s administration has called for both the expulsion of Russia from the UNSC P5 and a trial for Putin and other Russian leaders at the ICC. After the discovery of the atrocities in Bucha, France, Germany, and Lithuania expelled their respective Russian diplomats.

Biden’s call for a war crimes trial against Putin and his comrades is aspirational at best. The International Criminal Court serves a noble purpose: to “hold those responsible accountable for their crimes and prevent them from happening again.” However, the ICC itself states that they are a “court of the last resort” and are not a prescriptive solution to an ongoing problem. Additionally, the International Criminal Court is an international organization without strong enforcement measures. This is especially true in the case of Putin because both Russia and Ukraine signed the Rome Statute but did not ratify it.

However, the ICC does have limited jurisdiction over the Bucha killings because Ukraine issued a declaration under Article 12(3) of the ICC Statute, which grants special jurisdiction to the ICC over this specific conflict. There are additional issues with relying on the ICC to adequately handle the issue of the Bucha killings, including the slow timeline of trials and the difficulty of bringing Putin to court. It is highly unlikely that Putin will face trial by the ICC while he is in power. Therefore, an ICC trial would be more appropriate as a long-term response to the Bucha killings, rather than a short-term response.

While issuing a public condemnation of the Bucha killings was an absolutely necessary move by the Biden administration, the message would have galvanized more support if it came from a non-Western nation. Currently, historic U.S. allies such as India, the UAE, Israel, and Mexico have all refused to sanction Russia in response to their invasion of Ukraine. China, one of the world’s largest economic superpowers, has also refused to sanction Russia. Inflicting economic damage on the Russian state is a more compelling action than a simple condemnation. The recent U.N. General Assembly resolution vote proves this: 141 countries voted to condemn Russia on March 2nd, and nothing consequential has occurred as a result. To meaningfully impact the actions of the Russian state, President Biden should focus on convincing U.S. allies to impart sanctions on the Putin administration. 

As previously stated, the Biden administration should shift its focus to compelling its allies to enact economic sanctions against the Russian state. First, the U.S should take a strong stance against allies that continue to engage in arms sales with Russia. Between 2017 and 2021, the UAE, Pakistan, India, and Vietnam all purchased a majority of their arms from Russia. To prevent further arms deals with Russia, the U.S. should offer these allies competitive military commodity contracts. These contracts should compel states to avoid engaging in economic and military relations with Russia.

Second, economic half-measures will not change the behavior of the Putin administration. In order for economic sanctions to work, the U.S. must establish a near-complete economic quarantine around Russia. Professor Daniel Drezner, a political scientist in international relations, posited a system of “sticks” and “carrots” that the U.S. can use to compel its allies and foes alike. President Biden should first utilize economic “sticks” or threatened sanctions and tariffs against its allies that refuse to sanction Russia. These sticks could include ceasing arms sales, raising the prices of commodities, or looking to third-state, auxiliary suppliers. If these “sticks” fail to compel states, then the U.S. should proffer economic “carrots.” Carrots can take the form of aid packages, loans, increased arms sales, and lower commodity prices. Critics may argue that establishing an economic quarantine around Russia would negatively impact the U.S. domestic economy, and they would be right. However, that is a price that the U.S. should be willing to pay because it is one of the only ways to compel the Russian state to change its actions through non-violent means.