Russia, Japan Tobacco and the Weaponization of Global Economic Ties

On 5 November 2026, Vladimir Putin signed a decree where he placed four Russian subsidiaries of Japan Tobacco International (JTI) under Russian management, then two days later, three more companies linked to its Russian operations were added. 

JTI is not a small player in Russia. It has operated in the country since 1999. It owns well-known cigarette brands such as Winston and Camel. Today, it holds roughly 37% of the Russian cigarette market and employs around 4,000 people in the country. Even Japan's government itself owns approximately 37.55% of the company.

Officially Russia hasn't taken ownership of these businesses, but it has taken control away from their Japanese owners. It includes control on manufacturing facilities in several Russian regions and companies responsible for importing and managing its products. In other words, it has now control of the local operations. 

This isn't the first time. Since the invasion of Ukraine, Moscow has placed several foreign-owned businesses under Russian management. In 2023  the Danish brewer Carlsberg, the French food company Danone, Finland's energy company Fortum and Germany's Uniper. More recently, other foreign businesses, including Nestlé, Auchan and Metro, have also been affected by similar measures.

But Russia isn't the only country trying to use some of its economic leverage. 

The United States has used its control over the global financial system to pressure countries, currently Iran would be one of the best examples. Entities around the world can face serious consequences for dealing with people or companies targeted by US sanctions.

Technology is another example. Washington has restricted China's access to advanced computer chips, even affecting some companies outside the United States that use American technology.

Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022 and Western governments froze around €260 billion in Russian central bank assets. The EU has since used the profits generated by those assets to help fund Ukraine.

Of course these actions are very different from each other, they have different legal grounds and consequences, even points of view regarding the events also vary but they have shared one thing in common: they show that economic power can be just as useful as political or military power when countries want to put pressure on each other.

The paradox: The more we use globalization as a weapon, the weaker it becomes

Here I would like to pose a question to you: if countries can suddenly lose access to their money, technology, suppliers or investments because of a political dispute, why would they continue depending on one another?

Countries are looking for alternatives to Western financial systems, the most famous example is the BRICS. China is investing heavily in its own semiconductor industry to reduce its dependence on foreign technology, and governments around the world are reconsidering where they get their supplies and who they depend on.

I am not saying globalization is going to end, countries still need one another. What has been built throughout the years cannot disappear from one day to the other, but they're becoming more and more careful about to what extent they depend on others.

And that's the bottom end paradox: the more governments use economic connections to gain power over others, the more they encourage those same countries to find ways around them.

Globalization did bring the world closer together, but if economic relationships can become weapons, how much can countries really afford to depend on one another?