Why Did The United States Use Economic Sanctions

There are many countries that the United States frequently traded with who are now under a set of economic sanctions today. The sanctions were designed to restrict a country to the resources of their country and their allies until they comply with specific request. The US-Cuban sanctions were suppose was supposed to be in place until democracy and human rights were restored in Cuba. One effect of the sanction resulted in Cuban citizens only being able to purchase vehicles made before 1958. Although this is a minor effect of sanction, can you imagine if you were only able to possess a microwave that was made before 1958?

The United States is suffering economically. The imposed embargo that the United States imposed, The Embargo of 1807, did not work as Jefferson had hoped. It was supposed to persuade Britain and France to respect America’s impartial rights but it ended up backfiring and shut down the American economy. After only being in effect for 15 months, it produced economic hardship, widespread smuggling,

The Iran Hostage Crisis changed the political connections between the United States and Iran for several years to come. The Iran Hostage Crisis became a symbol of America 's global power and influence On November 4, 1979, Iranian students stormed the US embassy in Tehran, Iran, and took sixty-three Americans hostage. The students agreed that the hostages would not be released until the Shah returned to “Iran to stand trial for the crimes committed against the Iranian people.” (Bechtel). Despite the Shah’s treatment of the Iranian people, the President Carted allowed the Shah into the United States to receive medical treatment. Although President Carter made attempts to negotiate the hostages released, he failed several times. Because of his failures he was viewed inept and ineffective in regards to the crisis. The hostages were released on January 20, 1981, the day that President Ronald Reagan was sworn into office. This paper will discuss the main reason why the hostages were taken, and why they were not released sooner.

In the case of Iraq, the Nonproliferation Treaty of 1967 should have prevented acquisition of nuclear material intended for their WMD programs. Essentially, this treaty contained two key restrictions, which prevented those countries that already possessed the technology from sharing it, and those that did not possess technology from acquiring it. Although any country can acquire U235 (enriched at three to four percent) if declared to the IAEA for peaceful purposes, dual use loopholes allowed Iraq to

Trade embargos have tremendous consequences for countries that are being embargoed. The embargos not only affect the country that are being embargoed, but the effect bleed over the borders to the surrounding countries. The list of countries that have been sanctioned by the United Nations included Russia, North Cyprus, and Cuba. United Nations sanctions that target countries affect the economy, the morale, and encourages criminal activities to obtain goods.

Targeted sanctions are by no means a perfect method for persuading a change of behavior. Sanctions bring with them collateral damage, including trade deficits and project partnerships with the target. Legal difficulties are another aspect which can slow the process of persuading a target to change their actions, thus adding to the collateral damage. Targeted sanctions should have very little collateral damage in terms of harm to civilians, and finding ways to deal with collateral damage should include some sort of humanitarian relief efforts for civilians in the targeted country. Under European Union law every action, including sanctions against a target, must follow legal protocol defined in the Treaties. These legal difficulties within the

Economic sanctions are a viable method to isolate the government regime and force North Korea back into “denuclearization discussions” (Albert, 2017). In the past, sanctions have been used to hinder the economy in North Korea. In his article, Nolan (2010) describes the North Korean economy as poor and insecure in performance, so harming an unstable economy could put needed pressure on the North Korean government. The main problem with economic sanctions is the failure to enforce them. The reason for this is that the UN Security Council allows for each country to administer its own sanction and come up with its own terms, with no continuity across the board (Noland, 2010). This is what allows China to basically agree with the Council, but

Beginning in 1979, when radicals in Iran’s capitol, Tehran, stormed the United States Embassy and took American citizens hostage, executive orders have frequently been handed down aimed to curb Iran’s actions. In 1979, President Carter expressed that the situation in Iran had deteriorated to a point where the nation’s security, economy, and foreign policy were in jeopardy. Because of this, Executive order 12170 was issued stating, “(President Carter) hereby order(s) blocked all property and interests in property of the Government of Iran, its instrumentalities and controlled entities and the Central Bank of Iran which are or become subject to the jurisdiction of the United States or which are in or come within the possession or control of persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.”1 This order was the first of many that would later be given which further separated the two countries. Following Carter’s post-Iranian Revolution order, his successor, President Reagan issued Executive Order 12163 which, due to the

The United States has been implementing sanctions against Iran for many years, although recently, the US has significantly increased the sanctions in an effort to force Iran to reconsider their nuclear program.

Generally speaking we live in a world that is safer than at any other point in our history. Even so, we have become accustomed to the inevitability of conflict because there is no central authority. There is only a large number of actors participating in an arena with very limited rules and enforcement, so uncertainty is an accepted and expected part of global politics. Given the level of uncertainty and self-interest in such a setting there is unavoidable conflict, but conflict doesn’t necessarily equate to violence. History has proven time and time again the perils of interstate fighting which makes tools of statecraft that do not involve violence attractive politically and even tactically. Economic sanctions are by no means a perfect one-size fits all solution and the ultimate tool to change behavior is still military intervention, but non-violent tools of coercive diplomacy are used every day and have more power than ever before. As the strongest tool of coercive diplomacy that we have today they carry more weight than diplomatic pressures and can convey seriousness without resorting to the costly consequences of force. Sanctions are an attractive solution to many cases of discord, but it is important to note that the consequences of economic coercion can be great for both parties involved and have unforeseen consequences, so they must be used with discretion.

In September 2005, the IAEA 's Board of Governors found that Iran had several malfunctions and betrayed their obligations to comply with its NPT Safeguards Agreement (Kemp, Geoffrey, 2005). So the Use of force was justified with sanctions from US and their allies that was approved by the UN Security board. The use of sanctions have caused hardship for Iran as well as other countries.

Russia, Iran, and North Korea are three countries that have been up for recent discussion in regards for increased United States sanctions. These sanctions are often used to enforce laws or certain ideas. The Office of Economic Sanctions Policy and Implementation (SPI) “enforces and maintains sanctions in order to maximize their economic impact on target but minimizing the damage to U.S. economic interest”. Energy sanctions are often implemented for reasons including human rights issues, terrorism exportation, and national aggression. Sanctions can be put on a country by just the United Sates or Internationally. Countries such as Russia can be put under sanctions due to their violation of human rights. Iran is questioned for increased

State Department., n.d.). The Clinton administration imposed sanctions affected any person, country or company that invested more that 40 million dollars a year in Iran’s oil or natural gas industries (Gray, 1996, July 23). The Iranian government denied these allegations. The rest of the world continued to provide technology to Iran for the purposes of a peaceful nuclear energy program. In 2003 the European Union imposed economic sanctions on Iran due to the discovery of enriched Uranium being found by the United Nation atomic agency. The ban lasts as long as Iran continues to produce enriched Uranium. In November of 2004 a deal is struck between the EU and Iran to continue to help Iran develop peaceful nuclear power as long as Iran stops production of enriched Uranium. Between 2004 and the end of 2006 Iran completed construction of a heavy water reactor thereby causing the United Nations to ban the “import and export of materials and technology used in uranium enrichment, reprocessing and ballistic missiles” (Gootman, 2006, December 23). In 2011 the United Nations provided credible proof that Iran was working on a nuclear device, this evidence resulted in the strictest sanctions to date. The sanctions prevented Iran from conducting international

This paper will explore whether political economists can gain a useful insight into the utility of economic sanctions if they utilise game theoretical modelling. It will explore the various strengths and weaknesses of using such models, and whether there are any ways to rectify these weaknesses. My hypothesis is that game theory is a highly useful model for understanding sanctions, however the framework by which one analyses can vary and alter the games. Realists frameworks can allow us to gain a little insight, but game theory seems to yield more impressive insights when used within an institutionalist framework. The next step for the leading game theorist scholars in international affairs, is to improve on existing models by

The international community started to react against Iran nuclear program (Thompson, November 20, 2013). A sanction against Iran was passed by the UN Security Council after Iran did not stop its nuclear program. Sanctions could be said to be both effective and