These measures would admittedly bring pain to the West as well—which is why they have not materialized. Indeed, the Western response to the invasion has been characterized by a reluctance to affect daily life in Europe and the U.S. The U.S. sanctions implemented on February 24 explicitly exclude the Russian energy sector, likely because President Joe Biden wants to avoid an energy crisis. Germany’s response to Russian aggression has been muted by its dependence on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. According to the journalist Joe Barnes, Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi lobbied for a carve-out for Italian luxury goods from the EU’s economic-sanctions package.

Another roadblock is that the global ultrarich are sure to oppose measures that would hurt members of their class. The requisition of Russian properties would puncture the luxury-real-estate market of major cities. And of course, regulating offshored wealth and blind trusts would affect the bottom line of our homegrown plutocrats no less than Russians.

In the long term, however, the economic shocks caused by this response may be worthwhile. One argument in favor is ethical: Paying more for gas is a small sacrifice to make if it can halt a bloody war or limit the necessity for a military response. On a practical level, any pain resulting from this policy may eventually yield substantial paybacks. Khan suggested that the seizure of oligarchs’ real estate could raise £370 million a year, to be reinvested into London public housing. Funds from the requisitioning of other property could also be redirected to pay reparations to Ukraine and support its rebuilding.