The authors of the publication note that Putin is unlikely to end the war until he is convinced that continuing the fighting costs Russia more than stopping it. According to the publication, Ukraine and its partners must convince the Russian president of the impossibility of victory and demonstrate that further aggression will only weaken Russia. On August 7, the U.S. Senate supported a bill that tightens sanctions against Putin, other Russian officials, energy projects, and financial institutions. Its goal is to maintain pressure on Russia until it agrees to peace with Ukraine. Eighty-six senators voted for the bill, while eleven voted against it. The Economist describes this as a rare manifestation of bipartisan support for Ukraine amid sharp political contradictions in the U.S. At the same time, the authors consider the document imperfect due to the provision on new tariff powers for the president. The bill allows for tariffs of up to 100% on goods from countries that are the largest buyers of Russian energy resources, as well as on states that help Moscow circumvent sanctions. The U.S. president will be able to lift such restrictions if he deems it in the "national interest of the U.S." or modify them depending on the actions of a specific country regarding the import or transit of Russian oil and gas. "This is a significant freedom of action that Congress grants to anyone, not to mention Donald Trump," notes The Economist. As the publication explains, the authors of the bill proceeded from the assumption that traditional sanctions have not adequately changed Putin's behavior. An additional problem is Russia's "shadow fleet" of tankers, which is difficult to control and is used to circumvent oil export restrictions. This is why senators proposed imposing tariffs on countries purchasing Russian hydrocarbons. However, as the author of the publication notes, the greatest danger lies in the broad interpretation of the concept of "national interest." Trump has already attempted to gain the ability to unilaterally impose tariffs, citing an emergency economic situation. In February, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected such legal reasoning, after which the president's administration began seeking other legal grounds for trade restrictions. "The new bill could restore to the president some powers that the Supreme Court rightly took away," the publication states. According to The Economist journalists, the consequence could be rising prices for American consumers and new instability in international trade. The publication also warns of the risk of a trade war with India. Therefore, the bill still needs to pass through the House of Representatives, where the authors believe that the tariff provisions should be excluded. At the same time, Washington has other ways to support Ukraine, the journalists note. One of them is to help Kyiv increase its own production of Patriot systems by providing the necessary licenses. The U.S. has limited stocks of these systems, a significant portion of which were used during the war with Iran. This is how, according to the authors of the publication, Washington can simultaneously increase pressure on Russia and avoid creating excessive trade powers for the U.S. president.
