Why American Companies Keep Doing Business in Russia

(WASHINGTON, DC) – A growing number of Western companies, including firms based in the United States, continue to operate in Russia despite sanctions imposed after Moscow’s full scale invasion of Ukraine, according to analysts and public tracking platforms.

Data from the monitoring platform LeaveRussia indicates that more than 1,700 companies from NATO countries maintain some level of business activity in Russia. While some major firms have withdrawn following public and political pressure, others have delayed or limited their exit.

Consumer goods groups have been cited as examples. Critics note that companies such as Procter & Gamble continue to sell everyday products in Russia, while others took extended periods to wind down operations. Analysts say this reflects the broader tension between commercial interests and geopolitical policy.

Experts argue that corporate behaviour is largely driven by profit incentives. Under standard corporate governance models, executives are required to prioritise returns for shareholders and financial performance. As a result, ethical considerations are often secondary unless enforced by regulation.

They add that legal frameworks, rather than voluntary corporate action, are the primary mechanism limiting harmful practices. Without clear laws or enforcement, companies are unlikely to change behaviour, particularly in competitive markets.

Some commentators also warn that weak political will in Washington could reduce the likelihood of stricter enforcement. They argue that without legislative action or public accountability measures, companies will continue to exploit legal grey areas to maintain operations in Russia.

The issue has also extended to technology firms. Concerns were raised earlier over the reported use of Starlink satellite terminals by Russian forces in Ukraine. The system is operated by SpaceX, owned by Elon Musk.

In mid February, access to Starlink services was reportedly restricted for Russian forces, a move that Ukrainian officials say improved battlefield conditions. Analysts suggest the decision may have been influenced by reputational and financial considerations, including potential investor concerns ahead of a possible SpaceX public offering.

Reports indicated that Starlink technology had been used in attacks involving drones targeting civilian areas in Kyiv, raising questions about the indirect role of commercial technologies in the conflict.

Market observers say large institutional investors, including major asset managers and banks in the United States and Europe, play a significant role in shaping corporate decisions. Concerns over investor participation and reputational risk may influence strategic choices by firms operating in sensitive markets.

Despite these developments, analysts say sustained change is unlikely without coordinated government action. They argue that public pressure alone has limited impact in the current environment, and that regulatory measures remain the key tool for enforcing compliance with sanctions regimes.