Letters: How the UK should respond to Russia

Soft options

Sir: In relation to strengthening the impact of the Russian sanctions package (‘Tsar Vladimir’, 26 February), please may I suggest three enhancements? Firstly, to encourage the UK’s Dependencies, such as the British Virgin Islands, to enforce the UK’s sanctions on the government target list of Russian criminals who are operating within their corporate jurisdiction. Secondly, to define the Russian state, Putin and his cronies, as terrorists, much like the members of Islamic State. This is appropriate and proportional, and will enable institutions in the City, and elsewhere, to treat the Russians accordingly. And thirdly, to make the UK’s sanctions extra-territorial, much like the Bribery Act, which essentially enforces all UK based, not just domiciled, institutions to adhere to the sanctions legislation or lose their licence to operate in the UK. I believe what the UK lacks in hard power can be overcome with its soft power assets and a willingness to do the right thing for the Ukrainian nation.

Antony Edwards

Shillingstone, Dorset

Putin’s peril

Sir: Like many in the West, Timothy Garton Ash described Putin’s public address concerning the invasion of Ukraine as ‘unhinged’ (Diary, 26 February). This is fair comment, but we should not be surprised. Putin’s paranoid aggression is a product of Russia’s suffering from foreign aggressors: his parents endured the Nazi siege of Leningrad while his elder brother, Viktor, died of diphtheria. Even though Putin was born after these events, it is likely that any diminution of military influence close to Russian borders will be perceived as an existential threat. This is no apology for Putin’s behaviour but an attempt to emphasise the extreme peril he presents to the world.

Charles Jenkins

Penn, Buckinghamshire