The sanctions imposed on Russia by the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom and other countries in response to the invasion of Ukraine follow a long history of using penalties to force changes in behavior in certain nations.
But an analysis of measures of the type adopted in the past shows that the objective is not always achieved. Furthermore, in certain cases, there is a risk of unintended consequences and even that the result will be the opposite of what was desired, strengthening the government they intend to weaken and generating a negative impact on human rights, democracy and other aspects.
“If you look at modern history, you’ll see that almost every time a country violated international treaties, or invaded another country, or kidnapped citizens of another country (among other examples), sanctions were imposed,” he tells BBC News Brasil. economist Paolo Pasquariello, professor of finance at the University of Michigan, USA.
“But the track record (of the results) is not very good. In recent decades, to mention just a few examples, sanctions have been imposed against Cuba, Venezuela and North Korea. But, in my opinion, they have not produced the desired results”, observes Pasquariello. .
Studies estimate that only about a third of sanctions are usually successful and achieve their goals. One of the most complete recent analyzes on the topic was made by researchers at Drexel University, based in the city of Philadelphia, and confirms this estimate.
The researchers created a database with information on 1,101 cases of sanctions applied by countries, groups of countries or intergovernmental organizations since 1950, many of which are still in effect.
Sanctions were classified according to type (commercial, financial, military assistance, weapons, travel, and other types) and purpose (forcing policy changes, destabilizing regimes, preventing or ending wars, protecting human rights, restoring democracy, combat terrorism, resolve territorial conflicts, among others).
The next step was to analyze the degree of success, measured according to official government statements or “indirect confirmations in international press announcements”, and taking into account that these statements “may be subjective or biased”.
When sanctions still in force are included, it is estimated that around 30% are at least partially successful.
“Over time, more and more sanctions were rated as partially or completely successful, thus suggesting that sanctions have become more effective in achieving their goals,” the study says.
historical examples
The use of different sanctions to punish a government or force it to fulfill certain goals has been recorded since at least ancient Greece and was adopted over several centuries.
Starting in the 1950s, the period encompassed by the Drexel University database, the number of sanctions “continuously increased, and this increase has accelerated since 2018,” according to the analysis.
“We see this trend as evidence of the growing popularity of sanctions as a tool of coercive diplomacy,” the researchers say.
On average, more than 35% of all sanctions between 1950 and 2019 were imposed by the United States, the country that used this type of penalty most frequently. The analysis also reveals a “significant and continued increase in EU and UN sanctions [Organização das Nações Unidas] since the early 1990s”.
There are several examples of countries subject to these penalties in the analyzed period. South Africa was the target of international sanctions in the era of apartheid, the regime of racial segregation that was in place from the late 1940s to the 1990s.
Cuba has been the target of an economic embargo imposed by the United States for 60 years. Iraq was subjected to sanctions after the invasion of Kuwait in 1990. North Korea and Iran were sanctioned because of their nuclear programs.
Russia itself had already been punished in 2014 when it invaded Crimea, and many of the sanctions imposed on the country at the time still remain in place.
Suffering of the population
Economic and financial sanctions are the most commonly used, according to the Drexel University database.
Some of the measures are designed to be as specific as possible, only punishing certain individuals. But many others, despite being an alternative to military action, also cause great harm and suffering to the civilian population, including citizens who oppose the government.
However, even with the sometimes devastating impact, sanctions fail to achieve their objective in about two-thirds of cases.
“Usually, sanctions end up affecting the majority of people living in these countries,” says Pasquariello of the University of Michigan.
“I think that, although this is not said explicitly, the objective is really to harm the population of the (target) country.”
According to the economist, the purpose is to make the entire country understand that its rulers are doing something that nations imposing penalties consider wrong.
The current sanctions against Russia are considered unique in the scope and speed with which they were adopted, just days after the February 24 invasion of Ukraine. In addition, they are different because they target a nuclear power and a country that, despite not being considered an economic giant, has a crucial geopolitical role.
“Sanctions are usually imposed on small regional actors”, emphasizes Pasquariello, noting that these countries are not so important to the global economy.
“Russia’s case is different. It has a magnitude and scope that I have never seen in other sanctions in my 50 years of life.”
Among the penalties already adopted are sanctions on banks and members of the Russian government and the economic elite, including an asset freeze, travel restrictions and exclusion of major Russian banks from the financial system and the communication system used for international transactions.
Other measures include restricting imports of oil, gas and coal from Russia, banning the export of various products to the Russian market, including luxury goods, taxing the import of Russian products, and restricting Russian aircraft in the airspace of several countries.
Large private sector companies such as Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, Starbucks and several others have suspended operations in Russia.
These and other penalties are not only shaking and isolating Russia’s economy and financial system and its elites, but also affecting the general population. The ruble, the Russian currency, has plummeted, and the economy is collapsing.
“These are devastating economic sanctions, which are really hurting Russian citizens,” says Pasquariello.
“We are talking about 145 million people, many of whom cannot withdraw money from banks.”
The impacts of the Russian economic crisis should affect the rest of the world, with a global rise in oil prices and an impact on inflation.
success or failure
But despite this impact, Russia continues its military offensive, and it is not known whether sanctions will help Ukraine.
Russia banned the export of some products in retaliation, imposed sanctions on members of the US government and threatened to nationalize the assets of companies that withdrew from the country. There are also fears that the crisis will lead to a deepening of relations with China.
Pasquariello points out that it is always very difficult to predict whether certain sanctions will achieve their objectives.
Success or failure depends on a combination of different circumstances and factors — among them, the degree of economic integration of the target country with the rest of the world.
“Some might argue that certain sanctions imposed on Iran were effective in slowing the progress of nuclear weapons development and bringing the country to the negotiating table,” he notes, citing an example where punishments may have been successful.
Sanctions against Iran were lifted after a nuclear deal negotiated during the Obama administration in 2015. His successor, Donald Trump, abandoned the agreement and resumed punitive measures.
Earlier this year, Trump’s successor, current President Joe Biden, announced he would ease sanctions, amid fresh negotiations on a deal.
Pasquariello compares Iran to North Korea, where international pressure has failed.
“North Korea has been a country isolated from the rest of the world for decades and in which sanctions have failed to prevent the development of nuclear weapons,” he says.
In the case of Russia, Pasquariello emphasizes that one cannot analyze just one factor in isolation. According to the economist, the possible impact of sanctions must be considered in conjunction with other aspects.
“In combination with the fact that Ukraine is holding up better than anticipated and that the Russians have clearly overestimated their own military strength,” he said.
“I think all this creates a very precarious situation for (President Vladimir) Putin and the people around him.”
According to Pasquariello, it remains to be seen what the Russian reaction will be to this situation.
“Will it redouble (its position)? Or will it come to the negotiating table?”, he asks.
Read more on the BBC
I have over 8 years of experience in the news industry. I have worked for various news websites and have also written for a few news agencies. I mostly cover healthcare news, but I am also interested in other topics such as politics, business, and entertainment. In my free time, I enjoy writing fiction and spending time with my family and friends.
