Midterm 1 Flashcards
1
Q
Drezner’s definition of smart sanctions
A
- Sanctions that are structured in a way that hurts the elites or specific sectors of a targeted country and not the masses (arms embargoes, restrictions on luxury goods, asset freezes, limited diplomatic interactions, travel bans, etc.)
- Used to be either entirely comprehensive or very narrow focus (arms embargo and nothing else)
2
Q
Drezner on 1990s Iraq sanctions
A
- Comprehensive economic embargo that drastically decreased Iraq’s oil revenue, caused many magnitudes increase in cost of family food supplies and up to 227k child deaths
- Did not meet expectations that Hussein would be ousted in coup, did not get weapons inspections concessions from him either
- Blame placed on US and UN for humanitarian crisis
- Encouraged black market, organized crime activities in Iraq and bordering countries, monitoring organizations
3
Q
Drezner on implications of 1990s sanctions studies
A
- Called into question ethics and effectiveness of comprehensive sanctions
- Studies showed sanctions more useful as a threat, against democracy, when endorsed by international institutions, when dispute is of low salience to target, and little chance of future conflict, when potential economic consequences large
- Most often hurt public and can even enrich key supporters of target regime (incentive for rent-seeking, production of private goods for supporters)
4
Q
Drezner on historical development of smart sanctions
A
- Within UN, committees formed to assess effects of authorized comprehensive sanctions
- International conferences in countries like Switzerland, Sweden, Germany that were tasked with how to better implement sanctions
- US support for policy due to potential for combating financial abuse (money laundering, etc.)
5
Q
Drezner on effectiveness of smart sanctions
A
- Somewhat more humane than comprehensive sanctions (less likely to increase political repression, civilian suffering)
- Less likely to produce concessions from target government
- Major successes include Libya (although other factors like threat of invasion and back-channel negotiations aided success) and Angola arms embargoes (although arms embargoes typically actually benefit the largest holder of arms which is usually government in power)
- Overall mixed bag and further research needed into their long-term impact, relative effect compared to comprehensive sanctions, how they affect behavior in authoritarian countries
6
Q
Why do states choose sanctions over other options?
A
- Sanctions are typically (somewhat inaccurately) considered to be less deadly than military options
- Can cost less domestic lives
- Not always alternative to war, can be part of lead-up to military option
- In absence of any other workable alternative, to boost public opinion and perceptions at home
7
Q
How pervasive have sanctions been in recent history?
A
- Only two instances in Cold War (Rhodesia and apartheid South Africa)
- 1990s often referred to as “sanctions decade” where they became widely employed UN-authorized tool
- Today, about a dozen states and non-state actors (or their leaders) who are sanctioned
- US is by far most likely to impose sanctions
8
Q
What are secondary sanctions?
A
- Sanctions applied to institutions or individuals that do business with sanctioned country (US telling banks can either do business with Iran or US)
9
Q
Canadian sanctions today
A
- Against Myanmar, Belarus, Russia
- Restricts access on things like military equipment, nuclear reactors, chemical technology to more countries
10
Q
Sanctions against Canada
A
- OPEC in 1970s against Canada and allies to prevent support of Israel in Yom Kippur war
- Threat of many Arab sanctions in 1979 caused Clark government to back down on decision to move embassy to Jerusalem
- 2014 Russia imposes retaliatory sanctions and travel bans on 13 individuals (including then-journalist Freeland) in response to Canadian export ban in wake of Ukraine crisis
- 2018 Saudi sanctions on Canada following criticism
11
Q
Changing reasons and administration for sanctions
A
- Used to be due to threat to international order / “breach of the peace”
- Nowadays often used to promote better governance, slow development of nuclear weapons, discourage terrorism, etc.
- Used to be administered by new UN sanctions committee for each imposed sanction with little communication between them, all held behind closed doors
- Now more sharing of expertise, involvement of NGOS
12
Q
How successful have sanctions been historically?
A
- IIE study on sanctions between WW1 and end of Cold War argued that effective in producing desired change 34% of time (often criticized for using too broad definition of “success”, many others say only successful about 5% of time)
- Major success story is South Africa
13
Q
Reasons for lack of sanctions success
A
- “Rally effect”, where people in targeted state rally around government and sanctions increase nationalism (Cuba, India + Pakistan where sanctions produced demonstrations in support of nuclear testing)
- Naive expectation of change (states targeted tend to be most immune to public opinion
- Collective action problem (a few non-complying countries like Turkey and Jordan with Iraq sanctions undermined effectiveness) which can be due to refusal to comply with any sanctions not authorized by UN (India), profit from illegal trade (Liberia cut in on Congo diamond trade), countries that decide their own economies/traders will suffer as a result
- Rebound effect where sanctions hurt imposing country more than target (US prohibition on sale of grain to USSR in response to Afghan intervention doesn’t work, USSR just buys grain from other countries)
- Target-specific factors like high dependence on particular non-essential export (Saudi not sanctioned due to world oil dependence), size of economy, protective measures against sanctions (Venezuela in 2012 orders repatriation of many tons of gold so couldn’t be seized)
- Uneven impact that falls heaviest on masses
14
Q
Alternatives to comprehensive sanctions
A
- Smart sanctions
- Trade and investment incentives for good behavior and other forms of constructive engagement
15
Q
Background to Iraq conflict
A
- Saddam invades Kuwait 1990 and names it as an Iraqi province, US and international community condemn it and US puts forces in Saudi Arabia as part of Operation Desert Shield
- US then places comprehensive sanctions in place for initial period but assessed to probably not work in getting Iraq to leave Kuwait, so US begins air and then ground war 1991 (Operation Desert Storm)
- US then reaches ceasefire in return for demands including nuclear and chemical weapons disarmament, end of ballistic missile program, monitoring of disarmament, etc.
- Comprehensive sanctions for more than decade continued in order to maintain Iraqi compliance with demands
- War resumes 2003 with US invasion
16
Q
Problems with Iraq sanctions
A
- Some countries circumvented (500 trucks of oil smuggled from Turkey every day which then sold by regime to world market with unclear uses) due to bribes, desire for economic benefit, lack of pressure from US coalition due to fact that countries like Turkey and Jordan were allies
- Smuggling of goods (nature unknown) every day, approx 199 out of every 200 trucks from Turkey
- Iraq populations in central and southern provinces particularly suffered greatly with resulting calls to end sanctions, estimates up to 1.7 million deaths (although data hard to verify as mostly from Iraqi regime)
17
Q
Iraq oil for food program
A
- Takes 5 years to establish (Iraq adamant that regime itself will be responsible for delivery of food and medical supplies with only 300 UN monitors allowed to observe)
- Supposed to work by: Iraqi oil production –> sold to world market –> profits go to special UN office (to prevent misuse by regime) –> revenue divided 1/3 to compensation for war victims and 2/3 for food and medicine bought on world market –> distributed by UN in Kurdish north, Iraqi government in central and south
