hakimian6_ATTA KENAREAFPGetty Images_irancurrencynews

关于经济制裁的七大谬误

May 7, 2019 Hassan Hakimian

发自伦敦——美国总统特朗普对伊朗施加的制裁已经开始严重破坏该国经济。原本看似被伊朗总统哈桑·鲁哈尼（Hassan Rouhani）成功压制的通货膨胀卷土重来，在2018年达到了31％的水平。根据国际货币基金组织的估算，今年伊朗经济将萎缩6％，通胀率或会达到37％。伊朗国内多个行业都举步维艰，失业率一路攀升。为了将伊朗石油出口量降到零，特朗普甚至威胁要制裁中国，印度和日本这些持续购买伊朗石油的国家。

虽然特朗普这些单方面制裁让伊朗吃尽了苦头，但这些政策真的是美国政府预想中的的“灵丹妙药”吗？

自一战以来，各国政府越来越倾向于使用经济制裁来实现其国际政治目标。但尽管积累了一个世纪的操作经验，动用这些措施的理由却远未能让人信服。

To continue reading, register now.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

Already have an account? Log in

Support High-Quality Commentary

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world's foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads, book reviews, and insider interviews; Big Picture topical collections; Say More contributor interviews; Opinion Has It podcast features; The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

Subscribe Now

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 1 Comments on this article

j. von Hettlingen May 12, 2019

Hassan Hakimian studies the history of economic sanctions and explains why most do not work, no matter their justification. They act like an elixir to targeted regimes, but their people bear the brunt of economic hardships and suffer. Unilateral sanctions are highly controversial, if they are not approved by the UN Security Council. Trump’s unilateral anti-Iran sanctions have an unduly harsh impact on human rights – a violation of international law.
The author says sanctions were crucial to the defeat of apartheid rule in South Africa and Southern Rhodesia (today’s Zimbabwe), while some argue they helped prolong the regimes. Apart from targeting specific countries, the UN has also imposed sanctions on “non-state entities” such as al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and, more recently, the so-called Islamic State (ISIS). But sanctions do not dissuade terrorist groups, they may cause states that harbour and support these groups to reconsider the extent of their involvement.
The most common justifications for sanctions are often flimsy. First, sanctions are justified as “a gentler and more humane alternative to war.” This approach deprives the role of diplomacy to resolve conflicts. The author says, “sanctions often pave the way for wars rather than averting them: 13 years of international sanctions against Iraq were followed by the 2003 US-led invasion.” Sanctions were first imposed on Iraq in 1991 after it invaded Kuwait, yet some relating to trade, investment and conventional weapons were lifted since 2003.
The second argument that “if sanctions are hurting, they must be working” is untenable. They hurt the vast majority of civilians, while a class of entrepreneurs exploiting the situation to make fortunes. In Iraq, Saddam Hussein turned sanctions into gold, and Iran’s Revolutionary Guards benefit from sanctions, because they had built up an economic empire worth perhaps as much as one-third of the Iranian economy.
Third, it is cynical to say sanctions are “smart” and “targeted,” because taking a toll on the middle classes, the poorest and most vulnerable is a form of “collective punishment.” In fact, they are the “biggest victims of the very regimes that sanctions are designed to punish.”
Fourth, it is not true that sanctions serve to “uphold and promote human rights.” In fact, the targeted regimes need to find a scapegoat to blame for their problems. By portraying sanctions as foreign aggression and economic warfare, autocrats often accuse civil-society groups and NGOs of being allied with the enemy, which justifies a crackdown. In Iran’s case the hardliners attack the moderate President Hassan Rouhani, whose government had negotiated the nuclear deal with the world powers, from which Trump withdrew.
Fifth, it is wrong to say that sanctions are “necessary and effective in bringing about regime change.” While South Africa and Zimbabwe were exceptions, North Korea, Cuba, and Myanmar have not collapsed. Sometimes sanctions boost the targeted regimes’ legitimacy. In a different case, the emir of Qatar is extremely popular, thanks to the blockade imposed on Qatar by Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, and Egypt since June 2017.
Sixth, sanctions do not always “weaken the targeted countries.” While the business and investment climate suffers, the private sector bears the brunt. This allows the elites to take control over the supplies of strategic commodities and centralise the manufacturing.
Seventh, sanctions have litte effect on containing nuclear proliferation. Since the Non-Proliferation Treaty entered into force in 1970, India, Israel, North Korea, and Pakistan have acquired nuclear weapons. Three of them did so while under sanctions. Israel, Pakistan, and India refused to sign the treaty and built their nuclear arsenals. North Korea, left the treaty in 2003 and tested a weapon in 2006.
The author says, the “success or failure of economic sanctions is judged by whether they bring about regime change or change a government’s behavior.” Given the “prevailing misconceptions about their rationale,” it is unsurprising that not all countries react to external pressure as might a capitalist democracy. A rogue regime does not change its mind and put financial advantage above its definition of national interest, or political survival.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/0C3YYCCzh

关于经济制裁的七大谬误

Support High-Quality Commentary

Can Trump’s Sanctions Break Iran?

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Handpicked to read next

The Known Unknowns of US Sanctions Against Iran

Log in/Register

关于经济制裁的七大谬误

Support High-Quality Commentary

Handpicked to read next

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification