Covering Russia? UMW's experts are featured in the Harvard Kennedy School Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs

Steven E. Harris contributed this piece to Russia matters last fall

Aug 23, 2024

8 min

Steven E. Harris

West Sanctions Russian Aviation, But Moscow Decides to Keep Planes Flying Despite Risks



When the U.S. and its allies slapped sanctions on Russia for its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, severing aviation links was at the top of the list. Direct flights vanished and Russian airlines lost access to spare parts for their foreign airplanes. In retaliation, Vladimir Putin’s regime impounded foreign aircraft and shut off the world’s largest air space to countries imposing sanctions. Not since the early 1980s—when the U.S. suspended routes to the USSR over the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, repression in Poland and downing of a Korean Air Lines plane—have aviation ties between the two countries dipped so low. Aviation sanctions today are having an impact but come with a major risk. If the fatal crash of a jetliner killing hundreds is linked to the lack of spare parts, Putin will blame sanctions and the West. The stakes are high as Russia seeks to use any issue from cluster bombs to soccer to widen cracks in Western unity over Ukraine. To get ahead of this, U.S. policymakers and their allies need to better explain the effects of sanctions, why they’re worth the risk and why the Russian state, not the West, is ultimately responsible for any fatal crash.


U.S. government assessments place Russian aviation among sectors negatively impacted by sanctions. A closer look shows widening success in degrading this increasingly weak link in Russia’s political economy. By late 2021, foreign aircraft comprised 70% of Russia’s fleet of 801 passenger airplanes, which included 298 Airbuses, 236 Boeings, and 23 other foreign aircraft such as Embraers. In addition, 95% of Russian airline flights were on foreign-made aircraft. Consequently, sanctions aimed at depriving spare parts for foreign airplanes have caused many disruptions such as fare increases to cover higher costs of repairs. Some of Russia’s 53 airlines have periodically suspended or stopped flying some of their foreign planes. Reports of Russian airlines’ cannibalization of foreign aircraft similarly underscore a dire situation.


Less well known is how sanctions hurt Russian manufacturing since Western technology is critical to aircraft such as the Sukhoi Superjet 100, which uses a French-Russian engine (though Russians are working on a substitution). Production of the Yakovlev design bureau’s MC-21 passenger airplane faces significant delays due to sanctions that force substitution of its Western-made parts. Sanctions even helped push Russia out of a joint venture with China to produce the CR929 widebody aircraft. While China is happy to help Russia thwart sanctions, this plane needs Western systems that sanctions complicate.


In response, Russia has adapted to and thwarted some aviation sanctions, which I predicted would happen because Putin’s regime is reproducing a state-centered aviation sector rooted in the Soviet past. The war has accelerated the state’s growing control over this vital economic sector, which began before Russia’s 2014 invasion of Ukraine. Examples include the state’s 51% ownership of Aeroflot since 1994, the merger of two smaller, state-run airlines in 2003 and the consolidation of aircraft manufacturing in the state-owned United Aircraft Corporation (UAC), which was created in 2006. More recently, the Russian state has helped the country’s airlines weather sanctions by facilitating the illegal confiscation of foreign aircraft. Russian airlines have also proven resourceful by purchasing spare parts through brokers in the United Arab Emirates and Turkey. Better known for supplying Russia with drones, Iran also agreed to provide Russian airlines with spare parts and has been fixing an Aeroflot Airbus for months. Many foreign airlines continue to fly to Russia, and Putin’s regime rewards friendly countries with overflight rights.



But the longer sanctions remain, the harder it’s getting for Russia. To regain profitable foreign routes, its airlines are receiving government assistance to legitimately purchase the Western aircraft they illegally seized, although recent holdups in allocating such funds are causing doubts. In a throwback to the Soviet era, Putin’s regime boasts that Russia doesn’t need the West’s airplanes anyway since its one manufacturer, the UAC, will pick up the slack. Such import substitution is unlikely to succeed, as multiple delays suggest. More likely, Russia’s aviation sector will grow more reliant on the state, if not actually part of it like the UAC. This will make Russian aviation less efficient, less innovative and more expensive. Iranian airlines, which have long suffered under foreign sanctions despite some success circumventing them, present their Russian counterparts with a grim vision of the future such as being shut out of lucrative air travel markets and falling behind in emerging aviation technology.


How does this shape safety in Russia’s skies? The short answer is that it’s not as bad as headlines suggest and the impact of sanctions is ambiguous at best. Click bait stories paint a dire picture but often conflate commercial, military and general aviation into alarming numbers that do not accurately capture what ordinary passengers face. Some accounts, such as one claiming 120 accidents occurred in 2023, provide few details or sources. Annual safety reports from Russia’s Interstate Aviation Committee (IAC) allow for comparison over time but often obscure Russia’s situation by combining data from each post-Soviet state it monitors. Its 2019 report is mysteriously missing and its decision not to investigate the fatal crash of Yevgeny Prigozhin’s Embraer Legacy 600 plane suggests meddling from above.


That said, the IAC source base is the most systematic we have. Keeping in mind the potential for the politicization of its conclusions, what does a critical reading of its data alongside other sources suggest? First, fatal crashes in commercial and general aviation actually decreased in Russia from 18 in 2021 to 13 in 2022, and related deaths decreased from 70 to 24. Data for the first half of 2023 points in the same direction, with six fatal crashes and nine deaths. This trend was likely helped by the 14% decline in traffic after February 2022. While so many fatal crashes sound substantial, all but three in 2021 and all but one in 2022 involved small aircraft under 5,700 kilograms, not the jetliners we associate with most commercial flying.


Absolute figures on crashes and deaths capture headlines but they don’t say much about safety without considering their relation to passengers flown or departures. According to the IAC, the rate of aviation accidents and the rate of fatal crashes per one million departures both increased from 2020 to 2021 but then decreased in 2022. The IAC does not single out Russia from other post-Soviet states for this metric. But since Russia has the largest aviation sector among those countries, these data suggest that its aviation safety has not dramatically worsened since early 2022. Indeed, even critics who argue that Russian airlines are less safe partly because of sanctions conclude that “2022 and 2023 were also good years for airline safety [in Russia] compared to 2021.”


Comparisons with the U.S. similarly suggest that passenger aviation is not as disastrous as some headlines suggest. The IAC data indicates that Russia and other post-Soviet states are usually but not always behind the U.S. in passenger aviation safety. In 2018, for example, IAC countries reported a 0.8 rate of fatal crashes per 1 million departures of passenger aircraft above 5,700 kilograms. Comparable statistics from the National Transportation Safety Board showed a 0.11 rate for that year for scheduled U.S. carrier flights. In 2019, the rates were 2.3 (IAC) and 0.10 (U.S.), but in 2020, both IAC countries and the U.S. enjoyed a 0.0 rate of fatal crashes. The following year, however, IAC countries reported a 1.9 rate of fatal crashes, whereas the NTSB reported a 0.0 rate.1


Against this background of Russian airline safety, let’s now turn to the impact of sanctions. While some commentators emphasize that no fatal crashes have been tied to sanctions, others claim they make Russian airlines unsafe and that it’s only a matter of time before such a fatal crash happens. Some even argue that life-threatening dangers prove aviation sanctions are effective and could help turn Russians against Putin.


To reassure the public, Russian aviation officials insist the country’s airlines are safe despite sanctions, as do Russian business media and aviation journalists. This plays to Putin’s claims to legitimacy based in part on withstanding anything the West throws at him. In sharp contrast, Ukrainian media tells Russians their airlines are a disaster waiting to happen precisely because of sanctions. Independent Russian journalists banished by Putin concur, raising alarms about efforts to cover up the impact of sanctions and about the many ways Russian airlines cut corners on safety. In short, an information war exists around the morbid question of whether a Russian jetliner will crash and the role sanctions could play.


Fears of a fatal crash were validated by the emergency landing of a Ural Airlines A320 in September, apparently caused by malfunctioning hydraulics tied to sanctions. But a closer examination by a Russian aviation journalist suggests the pilots played a more important role by pressing on to an airport for which there wasn’t enough fuel. Recent Russian state assessments of aviation safety similarly point to pilot error and poor training as the chief causes of aviation incidents. More generally, airplane disasters are usually caused by a convergence of factors—bad weather, a manageable mechanical failure and pilot error—not just one problem. In public discussions, however, pinpointing sanctions’ role tracks more with the politics of the war than technical expertise.


At the end of the day, Russian airlines and aviation authorities are solely responsible for putting planes in the sky and Russians’ lives at risk. They continue to claim that everything is fine. But if a fatal crash of a Boeing or Airbus flown by a Russian airline kills hundreds, I predict this narrative will quickly change. Putin will blame the West as he does for everything else affecting his legitimacy, from Russia’s economic problems and his diplomatic failures to protests against his regime and even the war he started in Ukraine.


Such a scenario will be a serious test for policymakers who argue that punishing Russia with sanctions is still worth it. To prepare for this, they need to take a page from the Biden administration’s release of intelligence on Russia’s military buildup before the full-scale invasion: publicize as much intelligence as possible on sanctions and their impact, as well as Russia’s aviation sector and what it does or doesn’t do to ensure safety. As Putin’s regime falls back on Soviet-era secrecy about airline safety, sharing such intelligence will be a powerful tool. This will also contribute to broader Western efforts at combatting Russia’s better known disinformation campaigns such as those denying its human rights abuses in Ukraine.

Connect with:
Steven E. Harris

Steven E. Harris

Professor of History

Dr. Harris is an expert on modern Russian and European history.

Russian HistoryContemporary RussiaCommercial AviationGlobal SocialismAerospace History
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from University of Mary Washington

$787 a Month for a New Car? The Growing Cost of Getting Behind the Wheel featured image

2 min

$787 a Month for a New Car? The Growing Cost of Getting Behind the Wheel

Buying a new car is becoming an increasingly expensive proposition for American consumers, with monthly loan payments now averaging a staggering $787. According to a recent DC News Now report, the average new-car loan is approaching $45,000, raising concerns about affordability, household debt and the long-term financial commitments consumers are making just to get behind the wheel. And the monthly loan payment is only part of the equation. Insurance premiums, maintenance, fuel and other ownership expenses can push the actual cost of driving considerably higher. For consumers already managing rising household expenses, the decision to purchase a vehicle has become increasingly complicated. Beyond the Sticker Price: What Consumers Need to Know Dr. Kashef Majid, Associate Professor of Marketing at the University of Mary Washington, has studied how consumers value hybrid and electric vehicles, including the financial and environmental motivations behind purchasing decisions. He was also named one of the 50 Best Undergraduate Business Professors of 2024 by Poets & Quants. View his profile Majid has also shared his expertise with WalletHub, offering first-pen perspective on car insurance costs, pricing fairness and the importance of making informed decisions when shopping for coverage. His insights are particularly relevant as Americans face record-high car payments, with insurance premiums adding another significant expense to the overall cost of vehicle ownership. As consumers grapple with rising costs, Majid can help explain what's driving vehicle affordability challenges, how purchasing decisions are changing and what motorists should consider before taking on substantial financial commitments. If you're interested in speaking with Dr. Kashef Majid about rising car payments, vehicle affordability, insurance costs and consumer behavior, simply click on his profile below to arrange an interview today.

Measles Makes a Dangerous Comeback as Pennsylvania Outbreak Tops 1,000 Cases featured image

2 min

Measles Makes a Dangerous Comeback as Pennsylvania Outbreak Tops 1,000 Cases

Measles was declared eliminated in the United States in 2000. More than 25 years later, the highly contagious disease is making a troubling comeback, with Pennsylvania now confronting an outbreak that has surpassed 1,000 confirmed cases. According to an October 7 update from the Pennsylvania Department of Health, the state has recorded 1,078 confirmed cases across 41 counties, including 207 hospitalizations and five measles-associated deaths. The figures underscore the serious public health consequences of a disease that can largely be prevented through vaccination. The outbreak is also raising important questions about declining vaccination rates, community immunity and whether other states could experience similar outbreaks. Measles spreads through the air when an infected person breathes, coughs or sneezes. The virus can remain infectious in the air for up to two hours after an infected person leaves an area. Early symptoms include fever, coughing, a runny nose and red, watery eyes, followed by a distinctive rash that typically begins on the face and spreads downward. While many people recover, measles can cause serious complications, including pneumonia, brain swelling and, in rare cases, death. Two doses of the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine are approximately 97% effective at preventing the disease. Understanding the Outbreak and What Comes Next Dr. Lynn O. Lewis, a Professor of Biological Sciences at the University of Mary Washington, brings extensive expertise in microbiology, virology and infectious diseases. Lewis also directs the university's Irene Piscopo Rodgers School of Science and helped provide scientific guidance during the COVID-19 pandemic. View her profile With measles cases continuing to mount, Lewis can provide valuable perspective on how the virus spreads, why vaccination remains critical and what public health officials can do to contain outbreaks. She is available to help journalists explore several important questions: Why is a disease once eliminated in the United States returning? What makes measles so contagious? How do vaccination gaps contribute to outbreaks? And what lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic can help communities respond more effectively? As Pennsylvania continues its response, the outbreak is a reminder that infectious diseases once considered under control can re-emerge when the conditions that prevented their spread begin to change. If you're interested in speaking with Dr. Lynn Lewis about the Pennsylvania measles outbreak, infectious disease transmission, vaccination and public health preparedness, simply click on her profile below to arrange an interview today.

As Clocks Tick Toward the End of Daylight Saving Time, a UMW Sleep Researcher Explains What Your Body Actually Goes Through featured image

2 min

As Clocks Tick Toward the End of Daylight Saving Time, a UMW Sleep Researcher Explains What Your Body Actually Goes Through

The House passed the Sunshine Protection Act on July 14, 2026, reviving the national debate over whether the U.S. should adopt permanent daylight saving time, return to permanent standard time, or keep the twice-yearly clock change altogether. The bill now heads to the Senate. At the University of Mary Washington, Dr. Hilary Stebbins, Associate Professor of Psychological Science, studies the chronobiology and sleep patterns of college students, research that can help inform exactly this debate: how does shifting the clock affect cognitive performance and behavior, no matter which system we land on? Dr. Hilary Stebbins is an Associate Professor in the Department of Psychological Science at the University of Mary Washington. She is an expert on sleep deprivation, circadian rhythms, and dopamine function, and how each affects cognitive performance and behavior. View her profile Stebbins doesn't take a side in the policy debate. Her focus is chronobiology, how sleep patterns and circadian rhythms affect college students' cognitive performance and behavior. But that science speaks directly to the choice lawmakers are weighing: any shift, whether it's permanent daylight saving time, permanent standard time, or sticking with the current system, creates a temporary mismatch between our internal clock and the outside world, and it takes the body time to catch up. "One of my past teams found that as people report higher levels of sleepiness, they show higher dopamine function and also have more difficulty controlling impulsive actions." — Dr. Hilary Stebbins, Associate Professor of Psychological Science, University of Mary Washington Stebbins leads a year-long undergraduate research team (PSYC 491/492) each year, and in 2018 a team of her students won the Virginia Association for Psychological Science's award for best undergraduate paper for their research on sleep deprivation. Interested in discussing chronobiology, sleep patterns, or the science behind the debate over permanent daylight saving time, permanent standard time, or dopamine and behavior? Click on the icon below and connect with Dr. Hilary Stebbins, Associate Professor of Psychological Science at the University of Mary Washington, for expert insight into sleep research and its real-world stakes.

View all posts