Sanctions Relief Divides Public

Executive summary

The U.S. decision to ease oil sanctions on Russia has cracked open a fault line in Western war strategy — and American public opinion is splitting along it. A new pulse survey of 138 respondents finds the public nearly evenly divided on whether sanctions relief was the right call, even as hard data shows it delivered a $9.3 billion revenue windfall to the Kremlin at the worst possible moment.

The numbers tell a stark story: Russian crude export revenues nearly doubled — from $9.7 billion in February to $19 billion in March 2026 — after Washington granted a 30-day waiver on Russian oil in transit, reportedly tied to Iran's blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. That surge arrived just as Russia's Q1 budget deficit had already blown past its full-year projection of $60 billion.

Yet only 37.7% of survey respondents side firmly with Ukrainian President Zelensky that sanctions must stay strict. Another 27.5% think easing could help end the war. And 27.5% simply don't know. The public's uncertainty is real — but so is the revenue spike that critics say is funding Russian artillery.

On one question, respondents spoke clearly: 55.6% say allies who disagree on foreign policy should negotiate privately to find compromise. Less than 6% say the stronger ally should just win.

Context

On April 18, 2026, Iran reimposed strict control of the Strait of Hormuz — the chokepoint through which roughly 20% of the world's oil supply flows — as IRGC gunboats fired on commercial vessels. Washington, already engaged in military operations against Iran over its nuclear program since late February, responded by granting a 30-day waiver on Russian oil in transit, allowing purchases by any buyer regardless of existing sanctions.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent described the move as "a narrowly tailored, short-term measure" that "will not provide significant financial benefit to the Russian government." German Chancellor Friedrich Merz publicly disagreed: "We consider this wrong. Right now, the issue is one of prices, not volumes." The transatlantic rift — Washington loosening, Brussels tightening — set the stage for the sharpest allied disagreement on Ukraine war policy in months.

The survey captured American public opinion at this exact moment of tension. The 138-person pulse poll, conducted April 20, 2026, asked four questions: respondents' emotional and policy reaction to Zelensky's criticism of sanctions relief; what factors should guide sanctions decisions during conflicts; how much they believe sanctions actually influence state behavior; and what allies should do when they disagree on foreign policy. Free-response questions drew 126 and 132 replies respectively, yielding a textured qualitative layer atop the multiple-choice distributions.

The backdrop matters: the EU simultaneously passed its 20th sanctions package on April 23, targeting 46 shadow fleet tankers, seven Russian refineries, and 120 new individuals and entities — while unlocking a €90 billion loan to Ukraine. That divergence, with one Western anchor tightening and the other loosening, is the structural reality the survey respondents were navigating, whether they knew it explicitly or not. Only 7 of NATO's 32 members currently meet the 2% GDP defense spending guideline, adding further strain to the alliance's unified front.

Conclusion

The U.S.-EU divergence on Russia sanctions is no longer a diplomatic nuance — it is a live policy variable with measurable financial consequences. The IEA data on Russian revenues makes that concrete. What the survey adds is a window into how the American public is processing a genuinely difficult tradeoff: energy market stability versus war finance, short-term diplomacy versus long-term Ukrainian defense capacity.

The 37.7% who side with Zelensky are responding to real data. The 27.5% who think easing might help end the conflict are responding to a real energy crisis. And the 27.5% who don't know are responding honestly to a situation where the evidence genuinely pulls in multiple directions.

Three things to watch: First, whether Washington extends, narrows, or terminates the Russian oil waiver when the 30-day window expires — and what happens to Urals prices and Indian import volumes in response. Second, whether the EU's 20th sanctions package shadow fleet targeting produces measurable export disruption or gets absorbed into Russia's evasion infrastructure. Third, whether the 55.6% public preference for private allied diplomacy maps onto any actual U.S.-EU coordination mechanism on sanctions policy — or whether the structural divergence between Washington and Brussels deepens into something that Russia can exploit at scale.