In a ferocious escalation of hostilities, Russia bombarded Ukrainian cities and towns with an estimated 355 drones and nine cruise missiles early Monday, killing at least 12 civilians. Experts say the U.S. should impose steep economic sanctions on Russian President Vladimir Putin’s regime in light of its intensified targeting of civilian populations and its continued refusal to participate in ceasefire negotiations.

The early morning assault marked the largest single drone and missile attack in the history of the 39-month-long war, which Russia sparked after it commenced an unprovoked invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Russia’s onslaught comes just a week after Putin made symbolic gestures of being open to a possible ceasefire but ultimately refused to agree to ceasefire terms even after a direct two-hour phone call with President Donald Trump. It also came a day after Trump expressed disgust with Putin’s tactics of targeting civilian populations and frustration with being unable to reach an agreement with the Russian autocrat.

Just in the last week, Russia has launched 1,390 drones and 94 missiles at numerous cities across Ukraine, killing an estimated 30 civilians and injuring over 163, according to the Ukrainian Air Force.

“I’m not happy with what Putin’s doing,” Trump told reporters Sunday, remarking that he is “absolutely” considering imposing new sanctions on Russia. “He’s killing a lot of people. And I don’t know what the hell happened to Putin. I’ve known him a long time, always gotten along with him, but he’s sending rockets into cities and killing people, and I don’t like it all, okay? We’re in the middle of talking, and he’s shooting rockets into Kyiv and other cities. I don’t like it all.”

Following Monday’s assault, Trump reiterated his assessment of Putin on Truth Social. “He has gone absolutely CRAZY! He is needlessly killing a lot of people, and I’m not just talking about soldiers. Missiles and drones are being shot into Cities in Ukraine, for no reason whatsoever. I’ve always said that he wants ALL of Ukraine, not just a piece of it, and maybe that’s proving to be right, but if he does, it will lead to the downfall of Russia!”

On Monday, a source familiar with Trump’s Russia strategy told The Wall Street Journal that the president is, in fact, considering levying new sanctions against Putin’s regime, but they will likely not include new banking sanctions. Fellow Republicans like Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have urged the president to punish Putin with stiff penalties. Last month, Graham and Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) “introduced a measure to impose new sanctions on Russia and steep tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil, gas and uranium, which has attracted backing from more than 80 of their colleagues.”

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is also insisting that external pressure is the only way to deal with Putin. “Like any criminal, Russia can only be constrained by force,” he stated after Monday’s attack. “Only through strength — the strength of the United States, of Europe, of all nations that value life — can these attacks be stopped and real peace achieved. The increase in Russian strikes should be met with increased sanctions. Russia’s disregard for diplomacy and refusal even to consider a ceasefire must be met with a freeze on Russian finances and a halt to its oil trade.”

Lt. Col. (Ret.) Bob Maginnis, senior fellow for National Security at Family Research Council, concurred.

“Zelensky’s call for the United States to impose harsher sanctions on Russia — particularly by freezing Russian financial assets and targeting its oil trade — is both reasonable and strategically justified,” he told The Washington Stand. “To date, Western sanctions have been significant but incomplete. Despite restrictions, Russia continues to earn billions in revenue from oil and gas exports, much of it redirected to countries like China and India. Furthermore, a substantial portion of Russia’s sovereign assets — estimated at around $300 billion — remains unfrozen and thus unavailable as leverage. Strengthening sanctions, particularly by closing loopholes in energy trade and enforcing penalties against those who aid Russia in circumventing restrictions, would place meaningful economic pressure on the Kremlin.”

Maginnis went on to argue that stiff economic penalties against international rogue states have brought about measurable results in the past.

“History provides evidence that such economic measures can be effective,” he explained. “In the past, coordinated sanctions helped bring down apartheid in South Africa and curbed Iran’s nuclear ambitions. During the Cold War, economic strain contributed significantly to the Soviet Union’s collapse. While sanctions alone may not end the war, they can shift the cost-benefit equation for Russian leadership and potentially influence internal dissent or elicit dissatisfaction within Putin’s circle.”

Maginnis further contended that utilizing sanctions against Putin’s regime would serve the biblical principle of justice without resorting to war.

“Beyond the strategic calculus lies a moral imperative,” he emphasized. “If the international community stands for sovereignty, justice, and the protection of civilians, it must act to restrain a regime financing its war machine through global energy profits. Economic sanctions offer a non-military tool to resist aggression and uphold the principles of international law without triggering direct NATO-Russia conflict. From a Christian ethical perspective, stronger sanctions serve a just purpose. Scripture calls believers to defend the oppressed, uphold righteousness, and restrain evil. Using financial pressure to limit a tyrant’s capacity for violence aligns with biblical values of justice and peace.”

“In light of Putin’s hardened stance and continued brutality, Zelensky’s appeal for increased sanctions is not only warranted — it is essential,” Maginnis concluded. “The time has come for the U.S. and its allies to escalate economic measures, freeze Russian assets, and target the sources of Moscow’s financial strength. Doing so could be a decisive step toward forcing meaningful negotiations and ending the war.”