Image credit: Mark Wilson / Getty Images
August 06, 2018
America Is Addicted to Sanctions. Time for an Intervention.
In March 2016, shortly after the United States lifted sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program, then–Treasury Secretary Jack Lew gave a speech reflecting on the lessons Barack Obama’s administration had learned. Sanctions, he said, had “become a powerful force in service of clear and coordinated foreign policy objectives,” but the United States should be sure to use them “only to address significant threats to national security.” Overusing them, he warned, could dull their effectiveness. His logic was simple: Sanctions work because they cut targets off from dealing with U.S. citizens and American financial institutions—a complete severance from the world’s largest economy and its most important financial center. If Washington used this power idly, Lew suggested, it could encourage countries to find partners outside of the United States, and undermine sanctions’ deterrent effect.
Both the executive and legislative branches seem to have ignored Lew. Since his speech, the United States has reimposed sweeping sanctions on Iran, with restrictions on currency transactions and the trading of airplane and automotive parts going into effect on August 6; expanded the penalties against Russia and Venezuela; and pursued a maximum economic-pressure campaign against North Korea. Just after Donald Trump’s controversial Helsinki summit with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, a bipartisan group of senators unveiled new legislation to tighten sanctions on Moscow. To punish Turkey for its detention of the American pastor Andrew Brunson, the administration imposed human-rights sanctions on Turkish officials.
These days, policy makers not only impose sanctions with greater frequency—they’re also considering ever more extreme measures, and paying less and less attention to the drawbacks. At their most effective, sanctions are the product of multilateral efforts to solve clearly articulated, shared global-security concerns. Now they are becoming strident expressions of displeasure from an isolated United States, often wielded in service of domestic partisan priorities—a careless approach that may well neutralize the effectiveness of these powerful tools.
Read the Full Article at The Atlantic
More from CNAS
-
Volkswagen, then Stellantis: Billions for battery plants, but little on mines for raw material
Commentary
Canada’s critical minerals strategy has large aspirations, but these plans will go unrealized without a higher degree of focus and funding....
By Rachel Ziemba, Giancarlo Da-Re & Matthew Funk
-
Incentivizing Whistleblowers to Combat Sanctions Evasion
Commentary
Although misguided patriotism drives many Russian intelligence officers to support President Vladimir Putin’s war machine, money can persuade sanctions-evasion enablers — espe...
By Alex Zerden & Arshan Barzani
-
The Role of Investment Security in Addressing China’s Pursuit of Defense Technologies
Congressional Testimony
Summary of Testimony Chairman Bartholomew, Vice Chairman Wong, and Commissioners, thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony before the Commission.1 A summary of the r...
By Emily Kilcrease
-
The U.S. Needs an Economic War Council for China
Commentary
This week, Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen met with U.S. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Southern California. It’s the second time i...
By Charles Edel & Edward Fishman
