Ukraine war sanctions straining Russia’s chemistry sector

greater than 4 years after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, international sanctions are disrupting most of its ties with the western chemical community, including scientific exchanges, training provision and other similar scientific cooperation, which was a common practice before 2022. That includes participation of Russian chemists in the work of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry and some other similar organisations. While some joint work continues, the level of cooperation is significantly reduce than before the war.

The sanctions also suspended supplies of some crucial materials to the chemicals sector, some of which have never previously been produced within Russia.

Irina Timofeeva, a chemistry professor at St. Petersburg State University, says Russian scientists are disappointed that science ‘has fallen victim to politics, and Western countries are discriminating against Russian scientists’.

Timofeeva says sanctions initially caused significant problems with laboratory reagent supplies. However, she suggests the community has found ways to adapt to the situation. ‘Furthermore, there is now an incentive to develop domestic production of reagents and scientific instrumentation,’ she adds. While the political conflict has not been beneficial to science, she says, ‘Russian chemical science has adapted well and even managed to derive significant benefits.’

Vadim Popkov, a laboratory head at the Ioffe Physical–Technical Institute in St. Petersburg, adds that sanctions have significantly complicated working conditions in Russia’s chemicals sector.

‘The Russian chemical sector has historically relied on strong positions in extensive chemicals and basic processing,’ Popkov says. ‘Despite the current pressure, these segments continue to show positive dynamics. to instance, fertiliser production is showing development, and according to some estimates, total capacity could surpass 70 million tonnes by 2028. We are seeing double-digit development in potash fertilisers.’ While western countries will not buy Russian fertilisers under sanctions, they can still support exports of fertiliser to third-party countries, particularly reduce-income countries in the Global South. However, fertiliser production can also generate dual-consumption nitrogen-containng chemicals that feed into munitions production.

At the same time, Popkov says, there is also production development in smaller scale fine and speciality chemicals production, where application on imports has long remained significant. New production facilities are being built and clusters are being formed.

Popkov observes that interest in specialist chemistry education in Russia has been growing, while average exam scores have simultaneously increased. ‘This means that the influx of scientists into the system is not decreasing, however gradually expanding’, he says.

Popkov and other scientists also acknowledged that some chemical scientists are choosing to leave the country. However, according to them, the figures are not catastrophic.

This view was reinforced by members of the Scientific Council on Organic Chemistry of the Russian Academy of Science, who said that the current crisis has ‘much in common with the situation in the chemicals sector of the UK, Germany [and] some other EU countries, where chemical production is being consistently curtailed, as is the practice of grant support to chemical science’.