Did you know there’s a critical product – one without which we’d all be dead – which Europe is actually importing more of from Russia now than before the invasion of Ukraine?

It might feel a bit pointless, given how much chat there is right now about the end of the Ukraine war, to spend a moment talking about economic sanctions and how much of a difference they actually made to the course of the war.

After all, financial markets are already beginning to price in the possibility of a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. Wholesale gas prices – the ones which change every day in financial markets as opposed to the ones you pay at home – have fallen quite sharply in the past couple of weeks. European month-ahead gas prices are down 22% in the past fortnight alone. And – a rare piece of good news – if that persists it should eventually feed into utility bills, which are due to rise in April, mostly because they reflect where prices used to be, as opposed to where they are now.

But it’s nonetheless worth pondering sanctions, if for no other reason than they have almost certainly influenced the course of the war. When it broke out, we were told that economic sanctions would undermine Russia‘s economy, making it far harder for Vladimir Putin to wage war. We were told that Russia would suffer on at least four fronts – it would no longer be able to buy European goods, it would no longer be able to sell its products in Europe, it would face the seizure of its foreign assets and its leading figures would face penalties too.

The problem, however, is that there has been an enormous gap between the promise and the delivery on sanctions. European goods still flow in large quantities to Russia, only via the backdoor, through Caucasus and Central Asian states instead of directly. Russian oil still flows out around the world, though sanctions have arguably reduced prices somewhat.

The upshot is Russia has still been able to depend on billions of euros of revenue from Europe, with which it has been able to spend billions of euros on components sourced, indirectly, from Europe. Its ability to wage war does not seem to have been curtailed half as much as was promised back in 2022. That in turn has undoubtedly had an impact on Russia’s success on the battlefield. The eventual peace deal is, at least to some extent, a consequence of these leaky sanctions, and of Europe’s reluctance to wage economic war, as opposed to just talking about it.

A stark example is to be found when you dig deeper into what’s actually happened here. On the face of it, one area of success for sanctions is to be seen in Europe’s gas imports. Back before the conflict, around half of all the EU’s imported gas came from Russia. Today that’s down to around 20%.

But now consider what that gas was typically used for. Much of it was used to heat peoples’ homes – and with less of it around, prices have gone sharply higher – as we are all experiencing. But the second biggest chunk of usage was in the industrial sector, where it was used to fire up factories and as a feedstock for the chemicals industry. And that brings us back to the mystery product Europe is now importing more of than before the invasion.

One of the main chemicals produced from gas is ammonia, a nitrogen-based chemical mostly used in fertilisers. Ammonia is incredibly important – without it, we wouldn’t be able to feed around half of the population. And since gas prices rose sharply, Europe has struggled to produce ammonia domestically, turning off its plants and relying instead on imports.

Read more:
Payments watchdog could be abolished in PM’s purge of regulators
Russian oligarchs with links to Kremlin face UK ban under new sanctions

Which raises a question: where have most of those imports come from? Well, in the UK, which has imposed a clear ban on Russian chemical imports, they have come mostly from the US. But in Europe, they are mostly coming from Russia. Indeed, according to our analysis of European trade data, flows of nitrogen fertilisers from Russia have actually increased since the invasion of Ukraine. More specifically, in the two-year pre-pandemic period from 2018 to 2019, Europe imported 4.6 million tonnes, while the amount imported from Russia in 2023-24 was 4.9 million tonnes.

It raises a deeper concern: instead of weaning itself off Russian imports, did Europe end up shifting its dependence from one category of import (gas) to another (fertiliser)? The short answer, having looked at the trade data, is a pretty clear yes.

Something to bear in mind, next time you hear a European leader lecturing others around the world about their relations with Russia.

Waspi campaigners have threatened legal action against the government unless it reconsiders its decision to reject compensation.

In December, the government said it would not be compensating millions of women born in the 1950s – known as Waspi women – who say they were not given sufficient warning of the state pension age for women being lifted from 60 to 65.

It was due to be phased in over 10 years from 2010, but in 2011 was sped up to be reached by 2018, then rose to the age of 66 in 2020.

A watchdog had recommended that compensation be paid to those affected, but Sir Keir Starmer said at the time that taxpayers could not afford what could have been a £10.5bn package.

On Monday, the Waspi campaign said it had sent a “letter before action” to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) warning the government of High Court proceedings if no action is taken.

Angela Madden, chair of Waspi (Women Against State Pension Inequality) campaign group, said members will not allow the DWP’s “gaslighting” of victims to go “unchallenged”.

She said: “The government has accepted that 1950s-born women are victims of maladministration, but it now says none of us suffered any injustice. We believe this is not only an outrage but legally wrong.

“We have been successful before and we are confident we will be again. But what would be better for everyone is if the Secretary of State (Liz Kendall) now saw sense and came to the table to sort out a compensation package.

“The alternative is continued defence of the indefensible but this time in front of a judge.”

The group has launched a £75,000 CrowdJustice campaign to fund legal action, and said the government has 14 days to respond before the case is filed.

Read more:
What is a Waspi woman and what happened to them?

In the mid-1990s, the government passed a law to raise the retirement age for women over a 10-year period to make it equal to men.

The Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government in the early 2010s under David Cameron and Nick Clegg then sped up the timetable as part of its cost-cutting measures.

In 2011, a new Pensions Act was introduced that not only shortened the timetable to increase the women’s pension age to 65 by two years but also raised the overall pension age to 66 by October 2020 – saving the government around £30bn.

About 3.6 million women in the UK were affected – as many complained they weren’t appropriately notified of the changes and some only received letters about it 14 years after the legislation passed.

While in opposition, Rachel Reeves, now the chancellor, and Liz Kendall, now pensions secretary, were among several Labour MPs who supported the Waspi women’s campaign.

The now-Chancellor said in a 2016 debate that women affected by the increase in state pension age had been “done and injustice” and urged the government to “think again”.

Read more from Sky News:
Body found in search for missing jogger
Conservatives win German election

A government spokesperson said: “We accept the Ombudsman’s finding of maladministration and have apologised for there being a 28-month delay in writing to 1950s-born women.

“However, evidence showed only one in four people remember reading and receiving letters that they weren’t expecting and that by 2006, 90% of 1950s-born women knew that the state pension age was changing.

“Earlier letters wouldn’t have affected this. For these and other reasons, the government cannot justify paying for a £10.5 billion compensation scheme at the expense of the taxpayer.”

Russian oligarchs with links to the Kremlin can now be banned from the UK, the government has announced as part of a fresh sanctions package on the third anniversary of Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

The Home Office said “elites” linked to the Russian state can now be prevented from entering the UK under the new sanctions.

Those who could be banned include anyone who provides “significant support” to the Kremlin, those who owe their “significant status or wealth” to the Russian state, and those “who enjoy access to the highest levels” of the regime.

The announcement has been timed to coincide with the three-year anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Another set of sanctions is expected from the Foreign Office on Monday.

Security minister Dan Jarvis said: “Border security is national security, and we will use all the tools at our disposal to protect our country against the threat from Russia.

“The measures announced today slam the door shut to the oligarchs who have enriched themselves at the expense of the Russian people whilst bankrolling this illegal and unjustifiable war.

“My message to Putin’s friends in Moscow is simple: you are not welcome in the UK.”

The UK government said Kremlin-linked elites can pose a “real and present danger to our way of life” as they denounce British values in public “while enjoying the benefits of the UK in private”.

It said they can act as “tools” for the Russian state to enable President Putin’s aggression in Ukraine and beyond.

Shortly after the war in Ukraine started on 24 February 2022, the UK imposed financial sanctions on oligarchs, including closing legal loopholes used to launder money.

Read more:
Zelenskyy says he would give up presidency in return for peace and NATO membership
Pay back the billions of aid, Trump tells Ukraine

In November last year, Operation Destabilise, run by the National Crime Agency (NCA), successfully disrupted two billion-dollar Russian money laundering networks operating around the world, including in the UK which was a key hub.

They provided services to Russian oligarchs and were helping fund Kremlin espionage operations.

One of the key players was identified as Ekaterina Zhdanova who is alleged to have run a money laundering network called Smart. She was sanctioned by the US in November last year and is currently in French custody awaiting a trial.

A total of 84 arrests were made under Operation Destabilise in November and more than £20m in illicit funds seized.

The NCA has made a further six arrests since then and seized £1m more in case.

The networks also helped Russian clients to illegally bypass financial restrictions to invest money in the UK.

US officials have been in talks with their Russian counterparts in Saudi Arabia over the future of Ukraine for the past week.

However, neither Ukraine nor any European country was at the table, with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy saying he will not accept any peace deal Kyiv is not involved in.

Sir Keir Starmer has backed Mr Zelenskyy on that so all eyes will be on the prime minister when he visits Mr Trump in Washington DC this week.