Tariq Saeedi
The kneejerk practice of imposing economic and other sanctions by the west against any countries of the world is increasingly becoming an exercise in futility. These sanctions, in their myriad shapes seem quite intimidating but are neither ‘smart’ nor ‘targeted.’ — They deliver, but the intended outcome is hardly ever the thing they manage to deliver.
In many cases the sanctions on countries in the neighbourhood trigger unintended consequences for Central Asia. It is about time the region took a united stand at international and regional platforms to protect itself against the effects of ill-conceived sanctions.
The most recent cases are Iran under the new US sanctions, and Turkey facing sanctions from some European countries. These are two countries with deep and broad links with Central Asia.
* * *
The sad but undeniable fact is that the decisions taken with the mindset of yesteryears are not relevant in today’s world.
Sanctions as an instrument of coercion are losing their force. It is akin to the case of the fallen emperor, who may keep issuing orders but has lost the means and ability to enforce those orders.
* * *
An article by Dmitri Trenin, the Director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, published at the World Economic Forum website on 26 February 2015, questions the effectiveness of the economic sanctions.
Trenin contends in his article, “Applying sanctions is usually a double-edged sword. The country applying sanctions hurts its own businesses that trade with or invest in the target country.”
He reminds that sanctions can, and generally do, provoke counter-sanctions.
Trenin’s article asserts that the sanctions by the powerful countries against the weaker countries can cause damage but don’t necessarily lead to the desired results. He is of the opinion that more often than not the sanctions can generate internal unity in the targeted country.
How effective are economic sanctions?
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/02/how-effective-are-economic-sanctions/
* * *
The Washington Post published an article by Adam Taylor on 2 August 2017. It is titled ‘Do sanctions work? The evidence isn’t compelling.’
In the starting paragraph of his article, Taylor says, “You could probably argue that sanctions are among the most popular tools for responding to major foreign crises. The problem, however, is that nobody is quite sure whether they actually work.”
Citing the contents of the book ‘Economic Sanctions Reconsidered,’ authored by Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Jeffrey J. Schott, and Kimberly Ann Elliott, Taylor raises doubts about the ability of sanctions to satisfactorily lead to the desired goals.
Do sanctions work? The evidence isn’t compelling.
* * *
In their book ‘Economic Sanctions Reconsidered,’ Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Jeffrey J. Schott, and Kimberly Ann Elliott claimed that only 34% of the cases of economic sanctions could be called successful.
Robert Pape, in his article ‘Why Economic Sanctions Still Do Not Work,’ examines the claim made by Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Jeffrey J. Schott, and Kimberly Ann Elliott in their book ‘Economic Sanctions Reconsidered.’
His finding: I examined the 40 claimed successes and found that only 5 stand up. Eighteen were actually settled by either direct or indirect use of force; in 8 cases there is no evidence that the target state made the demanded concessions; 6 do not qualify as instances of economic sanctions, and 3 are indeterminate. If I am right, then sanctions have succeeded in only 5 of 115 attempts, and thus there is no sound basis for even qualified optimism about the effects of sanctions.
In other words, Robert Pape found that sanctions had been successful in only 4% of cases.
The book of Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Jeffrey J. Schott, and Kimberly Ann Elliott is available through Amazon and several other online bookstores and publishers.
The summary of the article of Robert Paper is available at this link – https://muse.jhu.edu/article/446920/summary
* * *
Some of the main partners of Central Asia, such as Russia, China, Iran and Turkey are frequently the target of sanctions, mainly by the United States.
These sanctions hamper the ability of Central Asia to pursue its full economic potential. This is violation of basic human rights because the economic progress is directly linked to the wellbeing of the populations. Anything that curtails the economic interaction of Central Asia with its main partners is an attack on the human rights of the populations of these countries.
A viable case, therefore, can be made to declare the unilateral sanctions an illegal act and an act of aggression.
Like a Court of Justice, there should be a Court of Sanctions, with worldwide jurisdiction and the ability to enforce its decisions, whether for or against sanctions. If any sanctions are to be imposed at all, they should come through the Court of Sanctions. This should be the only authority to impose and lift sanctions and it should not grant veto power to any of its members.
* * *
Meanwhile, there are ways to rollback the irresponsible practice of unilateral sanctions:
- In future trade deals the Central Asian countries should try to make the transactions in the mutual currencies, or in barter. The US Dollar is the backbone of the sanctions and this backbone needs to be fractured for the sake of global stability.
- Central Asia should create a joint think tank to study the consequences of sanctions and try to present the findings at every global and regional platform.
- Central Asia should find ways to raise its voice forcefully in the mainstream and social media to condemn the practice of unilateral sanctions.
The good thing is that during the past 20 years or so, the world is steadily moving toward a state of equilibrium — We are nearing the time when no single country or a group of countries would be able to impose its will on the world. /// nCa, 16 October 2019