Power of Sanctions

What are Sanctions?

These are the enforcement measures for maintenance or restoration of international peace and security. Such measures may range from economic and/or other sanctions not involving the use of armed force to international military action. The use of mandatory sanctions is intended to apply pressure on a State or entity to comply with the objectives set by the Security Council without resorting to the use of force.

The range of sanctions include comprehensive economic and trade sanctions and/or more targeted measures, such as arms embargoes, travel bans, financial, or diplomatic restrictions. They are often one of the few middle grounds between war and words. 

Who can impose Sanctions?

• Security Council: Under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, the Security Council is authorised to take enforcement measures. Sanctions thus offer the Security Council an important instrument to enforce its decisions.
• Unilateral sanctions: Countries also can impose sanctions unilaterally.

Does the imposition make any difference?

They have meaning only when imposed by a powerful country like the USA that can manipulate the levers of international power like diplomacy, commerce, trade, banking, transportation, etc., and is able to influence other countries to join the process.

The use of international sanctions over the arc of history—trade embargoes, financial penalties, export controls, travel restrictions, consumer boycotts and other means to impose punishment on and compel policy changes from adversaries—dates back many centuries. Yet, as ingenious and sophisticated as these regimes have become and despite their ubiquity, their effectiveness in achieving the outcomes sought remains dubious. This because inducing alteration in human conduct in specific directions through employment of incentives and disincentives in complex political, economic and social settings with multiple actors in play, whether apparent or potential, is far more art than science.

There is the issue of gaming the timing and speed of the imposition of sanctions—whatever tools are chosen. The announcement per se of forthcoming sanctions is meant to send a signal to achieve deterrence. But this works only if the follow-through on the implementation of the announcements is credible (i.e., actually carried out); the specific sanctions are well chosen and are aimed at targets that will “move the needle” of the adversary (or adversaries); and the timing corresponds to assumptions about forthcoming adversarial moves.

As a general rule, the more comprehensive sanctions are, the more sectors that are covered by sanctions, and the tighter the coalition of the countries imposing and enforcing such sanctions, the probability of their effectiveness increases. Yet, these are general precepts. There is no cookie-cutter formula to guarantee success. Complexities abound.

Therefore, often the imposition of sanctions looks like a reasonable option. But probably too often. History has taught us that the effectiveness of sanctions—even if they are scrupulously enforced—rarely bring about the sought-after outcomes: alteration in the targeted adversaries’ decision-making calculus.