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
-
Ziemba: Oil Market Overlooks Buffers Amid Long Conflict
Oil held a decline as tankers laden with crude continued to exit the Persian Gulf, despite persistent threats and limited progress on a deal between Iran and Oman to reopen th...
By Rachel Ziemba
-
Jones Act Relief Extended, Iran War Presses On
President Trump extended a waiver Monday for foreign ships transporting oil around the US as the war in Iran continues to disrupt supply chains. Bloomberg News' Mike McKee & B...
By Chris Kennedy
-
The Blind Spot in U.S.-China AI Competition with Paul Haenle and Terah Lyons
Paul Haenle and Terah Lyons of JPMorganChase join Emily and Geoff to talk about their recent report on U.S.-China AI competition and what policymakers miss when they only look...
By Emily Kilcrease & Geoffrey Gertz
-
Weapons Stockpiles Become the Next Constraint
Rachel Ziemba, adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security, joins Bloomberg Surveillance to discuss U.S. weapons stockpiles and their impact on future nego...
By Rachel Ziemba
