Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –
Source: State University Higher School of Economics – State University Higher School of Economics –
Students from the International Institute of Economics and Finance and the Faculty of World Economy and International Relations discussed the positive and negative aspects of the impact of sanctions on the Russian economy during a debate.
© MIEF
On April 2, a student debate was held, jointly organized by ICEF and FMEI on the topic “The Impact of Sanctions on the Russian Economy”. The students were divided into two “mixed” teams in advance, each of which was offered a position to defend in the debate.
The debate began with a short presentation of the teams’ positions. The team led by ICEF student Daria Tochilina, defending the position “Sanctions rather have a positive effect on the Russian economy”, emphasized the importance of the agricultural sector, which has shown significant growth since the introduction of sanctions in 2014. They also drew attention to the stability of the Russian financial sector, which has demonstrated positive dynamics and sufficient independence from the international payment system. The foundations for this, including the creation of its own payment system, were laid during the same period.
The team noted that companies that had previously borrowed on international markets and transferred profits abroad had now switched to the domestic market. This led to a reduction in capital outflow, including due to the restrictions introduced. As a result, the savings rate in Russia, which is one of the main growth factors, has increased. The team also used the example of the oil and gas sector to show Russia’s diversification in the choice of trading partners, which has a positive effect on strengthening international relations and the revenue of companies in this sector.
The team led by FMEiMP student Gleb Lopatin, who presented the thesis “Sanctions rather have a negative impact on the Russian economy”, focused on the growth of transaction costs when redirecting commodity and financial flows. The team also noted problems with settlements that arose due to the disconnection of a large number of banks from SWIFT. Other negative factors, especially in the long term, were limited access to innovative products and the outflow of human capital.
In the second, “cold” part of the debate, the teams took turns asking each other questions. Thus, the “negative influence” team put forward a counterexample to the opponents’ argument about the creation of an analogue of SWIFT in the Russian Federation (SPFS) and the introduction of alternative forms of payment about additional difficulties associated with the ban on the use of SPFS by foreign companies. The students also noted the example of “stuck” payments in India in 2023, which demonstrates that many of the problems that arose were new in nature and the financial system was not always prepared for them. The “positive” influence team responded to the question about the effect of international companies leaving Russia with statistics on the accelerated development of small and medium-sized businesses in Russia associated with the emergence of “niches” in the market. Data on the growth of salaries and real disposable incomes of the population in Russia in 2023-24 were presented.
The third part of the debate was the most heated, as participants had the opportunity to ask questions without observing the order, and even interrupt their opponents. In this part, the teams returned to discussing the effects on individual sectors and economic agents. High dividends of Lukoil, successes in the development of the IT and electronics market were noted, but also problems with payments and individual services in Russia. The departure of individual companies, on the one hand, created new opportunities for Russian business, but, on the other hand, in a number of cases, negatively affected the supply and orders for local manufacturers (the example of IKEA).
The moderator of the discussion, Director for the Development of Teaching Excellence A. V. Dementyev, played an important role in the debate. Andrey Viktorovich regulated the “degree” of the discussion and asked both teams pointed questions. Thus, at first he suggested that both teams give a clear definition of “sanctions” for further discussion, and during the discussion he asked the team for the “positive effect” to think about the choice between the position of “sanctions do not work” and “sanctions are useful”, and he suggested that the team for the “negative impact” highlight the structural long-term and short-term effects of the sanctions.
Following the debate, the jury, consisting of Deputy Director of the Department of Eurasian Integration of the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation S.A. Raschukov, Head of the Monitoring Department of the Department for Control over External Restrictions of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation V.A. Filippov, Deputy Director of the ICEF O.O. Zamkov, Deputy Dean of the Faculty of World Economy and International Relations A.K. Morozkina, Deputy Head of the Scientific and Methodological Department of the ICEF N.E. Kogutovskaya, determined the winner. It was the team in defense of “positive” effects, which demonstrated greater flexibility in adapting to different areas of discussion. It should be borne in mind that it was not the positive or negative effect itself that was assessed, but the persuasiveness of the teams in presenting each of these positions. The participants in the debate noted during the debate that it is impossible to unambiguously determine the prevalence of positive or negative effects. In the short and long term, negative effects may be more pronounced, while in the medium term – positive ones. At the same time, the impact of sanctions on different sectors of the economy and different economic agents varies.
The debates were energetic, the participants showed a high level of involvement and activity, and the jury highly appreciated the level of preparation and performance of both teams! We wish the guys further success!
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.