Two years of Russian aggression: Decisive action by Western states urgently needed to ensure responsible business conduct - Business & Human Rights Resource Centre

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

57% : The companies said they complied with applicable laws and regulations, did not sell products to Russia and did not know how they ended up in Russian weapons.
55% : This can be further enhanced by introducing deterrent measures, including financial penalties or restriction of access to public procurement for companies continuing operations in the aggressor state without undertaking heightened human rights due diligence.
53% : For instance, the EU purchased €13.7 billion worth of critical raw materials from Russia following the invasion of Ukraine to July 2023.
49% : It becomes even more alarming when you learn that one of the companies the Ukrainian Government had to take off the list is Austrian Raiffeisen Bank, which in addition to continuing operations in the aggressor state, works with the sanctioned state-owned Sberbank, has recognised the occupied Donetsk and Luhansk territories through its representative office in Russia, invests heavily in Russian oil and gas assets, and grants loan deferrals to Russian soldiers.
43% : Even though the EU imports fund Russia's war economy, these minerals are not banned because they are considered critical for the EU.
35% : In response to Russia's invasion, the US, the EU and other Western countries have imposed unprecedented sanctions as they seek to undermine Russia's ability to continue its aggression.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.