The European Union’s decision this week to extend sanctions against Russia over its illegal annexation of Crimea and the port city of Sevastopol until June 2026 is a welcome show of resolve.
More than a decade after Vladimir Putin’s troops rolled into the peninsula and declared it Russian territory, Europe is only just beginning to grasp the scale and permanence of the challenge posed by Kremlin imperialism.
The annexation of Crimea in 2014 was not just a breach of Ukraine’s sovereignty; it was a calculated assault on the entire post-Cold War order. The rules that held together an uneasy peace in Europe since 1991—respect for borders, state sovereignty, and international law—were tossed aside by the Kremlin with the sort of swagger that has now become Putin’s trademark. And what was the West’s response? Sanctions, certainly—but watered-down, often belated, and patchily enforced.
The measures that Brussels has now renewed—restrictions on imports from Crimea, bans on investment and tourism, and prohibitions on exports of key technologies—have symbolic value. They make it clear that the EU does not recognise Russia’s land grab. But they have always suffered from a fatal flaw: they are too narrowly targeted and, on their own, have failed to dislodge Moscow’s grip on the peninsula.
Crimea remains firmly in Russian hands. It has been flooded with troops, transformed into a military outpost, and increasingly integrated into Russia’s administrative, legal and economic systems. Ethnic Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars have been persecuted, imprisoned or driven out, while Russian settlers have been bussed in to change the demographic balance. The so-called “facts on the ground” have hardened—and for the Kremlin, they are facts it hopes the world will eventually accept.
In renewing the sanctions for another two years, the European Council reiterated its refusal to recognise the annexation, and recommitted to its policy of non-recognition: a small gesture, perhaps, but an important one. In diplomacy, consistency matters.
Still, one can’t help but feel that Brussels is clinging to a formula that was inadequate from the start. The Crimea sanctions were devised in 2014, at a time when the EU still hoped for a return to business as usual with Moscow. They were never meant to be a serious long-term deterrent. Fast forward to 2024, and Russia has expanded its aggression to the rest of Ukraine, launched a full-scale invasion, and committed war crimes in Bucha, Mariupol and countless other cities. Yet the measures against Crimea have barely evolved.
Why not go further? If the EU is truly serious about punishing Moscow and deterring future land grabs, it should treat the annexation of Crimea not as a standalone episode, but as the opening act in a larger war of conquest. The sanctions regime must be updated to reflect that reality. That means tightening enforcement, closing loopholes, and expanding the list of individuals and entities targeted by asset freezes and travel bans. And it means punishing the collaborators and profiteers—European and otherwise—who still do business in Crimea behind the scenes.
Moreover, it is high time that Brussels and its member states stepped up support for Ukraine’s efforts to reclaim the peninsula. That doesn’t mean NATO boots on the ground, but it does mean serious military aid, intelligence sharing, and assistance with Ukraine’s goal of making Crimea militarily untenable for Russian forces. The West’s quiet assumption—that Crimea is lost—must be challenged. Ukraine does not share it, nor should we.
Critics will say that reclaiming Crimea is unrealistic, that it risks nuclear escalation, and that we must instead prioritise a ceasefire and negotiations. But such arguments ignore both history and principle. When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, the international community did not settle for containment or an armistice; it demanded withdrawal and enforced it. Why should Russia be treated differently?
The EU’s renewed sanctions are better than nothing. They send a clear, if largely symbolic, message that the Kremlin’s land theft will never be accepted. But symbolism alone won’t win this war. It’s time for the EU to translate its lofty declarations into a tougher, more coherent strategy—one that not only defends Ukraine’s borders but reasserts the West’s belief in the rules that once held Europe together.
In a world where might increasingly makes right, the defence of Crimea is about far more than one peninsula. It is about whether the West still has the backbone to stand up to tyranny.
