ECONOMIC SANCTION
International relations are described as a study of the interconnectedness of economics, politics, and law on a global level (Mingst, McKibben & Arreguin-Toft, 2018). A sanction, on the other hand, describes a penalty that is levied on a different state or an individual citizen of a separate nation. Sanctions are applied as instruments of foreign policy as well as economic pressure and entail international politics and trade. The aim of economic sanctions is to transform the strategic decision making of both the states and the non-states that challenge or interfere with the international code of behavior. Opponents of economic sanctions argue that they are conceived poorly, which explains their failure in transforming the behavior of the targeted party. On the other hand, the proponents of economic sanctions argue that in recent years, they have improved in their effectiveness; therefore, they are critical foreign policy. This provides a basis for this paper to look at the realism and liberalism theory and how they can be used to explain the economic sanction issue. Also, it will look at the effects of economic sanctions impacting the targeted country’s citizens as well as their human rights concerns. Additionally, it will look at the embargo on Cuba and also the sanctions imposed on Cote d’Ivoire. Lastly, it also looks at the globalization concept concerning economic sanctions.
Economic sanction
Economic sanction refers to financial and commercial penalties enforced by one or more nations against a given targeted individual, group, or a governing country. The sanctions may also be enforced on various grounds, including military, political, and social problems. Generally, economic sanctions can be applied to attain domestic and global goals. For instance, sanctions are used in advancing the objectives of foreign policies to encompass conflict resolution, cybersecurity, nonproliferation, counterterrorism, and counternarcotic, among others. The sanctions usually aim at transforming the elites’ behaviors sin a target nation. Since 9/11, there has been a significant transition towards targeted sanctions whose aim is to reduce the suffering of the civilians. Sanctions take different forms, such as arms embargoes, travel bans, freezing of assets, trade restrictions, and also foreign aid reductions. The embargo, as a form of economic sanction, implies a more severe sanction. It is described as the partial or complete commerce and trade prohibition with a specific nation or a group of nations.
Economic sanctions have become widely applied in the modern world both in the form of unilateral and multilateral levels. International institutions such as the United Nations and European Union also apply the sanctions as a means of punishing or shaming entities that do not adhere to their stipulations of behavioral conduct. According to Drezner (2015), sanctions are low risk and low-cost form of intervention when viewed in line with war and foreign diplomacy. For instance, Iraq was sanctioned by the United Security Council following Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990. The use of military forces was authorized four months later (Drezner, 2015). Sanctions are a global concern since they are associated with various impacts such as to the country’s citizens, human rights concerns as well as the intended purpose and ethic consideration. Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page
Realism theory
Realism theory is a set of international relations theories that emphasize on country’s role, military power, and national interests in the world of politics (Galston, 2010). The theory emerged since the end of World War II. Realists usually claim to provide the most accurate description of the behavior of a country as well as a set of policy prescriptions enhancing the intrinsic destabilizing factors of international relations (Galston, 2010). Realism theory usually focuses on enduring interaction patterns in an international system that lacks centralized political governance. Generally, realists appear pessimistic concerning radical systemic reform possibilities.
The realism theory of international affairs rejects the liberal faith, which emphasizes the incremental pressure of the economy with the application of sanctions. The realist note that the primary concerns of national security are very essentials to the countries willing to pay the economical price as opposed to surrendering core security issues (Galston, 2010). Moreover, economic sanctions can be described as a two-edged sword since they penalize both the targeted nation and those in the sanctioning nation through disruption of business between the parties.
Liberalism theory
Liberalism describes a school of thought with the theory of international relations. Liberalism fronts three elements that encourage less conflict and more cooperation among countries (Robinson, 2010). First, it emphasizes on international institutions, including the United Nations, which offers a forum of resolving disputes through the use of nonviolent approaches. Second, liberalism emphasizes international trade since when economies of nations are interlinked via trade, they face less likelihood of indulging in a war against one another. Finally, the school of thought emphasizes the spread of democracy because well-established democracies do fight each other (Robinson, 2010). The interaction among states happens in several ways, including financial, economic, and cultural exchanges. Besides, liberals maintain that internal diplomacy could become an efficient approach to enhancing the interaction of countries in honest ways and supporting peaceful solutions to issues. According to liberals, countries can jointly work to minimize conflict and maximize prosperity (Robinson, 2010).
Levels of analysis
The two levels of analysis include the national and human rights standards. Economic sanctions can be enforced on a unilateral basis where a single nation enacts the sanction. Unilateral sanctions are considered riskier as opposed to multilateral sanctions since, even though an economically powerful nation can effectively enforce them.
Human rights and economic sanctions
If the economic sanctions fail to attenuate the target elites’ coercive capacity as well as developing more political violence and economic difficulties among the ordinary citizens, the government is expected to be more likely to commit violations of human rights (Peksen & Drury, 2010). There are competing views concerning why sanctions could enhance or deteriorate the conditions of human rights. Primarily, extensive sanctions lead to detrimental effects on human rights as opposed to selective or partial sanctions. Economic sanctions, therefore, violate human rights as they usually punish the wrong person. When the leaders decide to undertake a given action that contravenes the behavioral code, the citizens usually have not to voice in the matter more so in authoritarian regimes. Additionally, comprehensive or selective sanctions fail to affect the political leaders of the country because they have the means to survive when the economy is undergoing a meltdown. For instance, countries such as North Korea, Cuba, and Iran have determined methods to continue being in power even after comprehensive sanctions have been leveled against them (De Waart, 2015). The effect of economic sanctions can be viewed with respect to North Korea, whereby allegations were made regarding the rise of cannibalism due to the comprehensive sanctions applied to the country. The violation of human rights can also be viewed with respect to Zimbabwe (De Waart, 2015). The country under the leadership of Robert Mugabe was sanctioned in 2002. The country experienced an economic meltdown which lowered the quality of life for its citizen and ruined its reputation as the breadbasket of Africa. This raises questions on the justification of economic sanctions as they do not deter the political leaders; rather, they punish the poor who are in vulnerable positions more so in the face of the economic shocks resulting from the sanctions (De Waart, 2015). This challenges the justification of economic sanctions because, as observed in the above-mentioned countries, they do not fulfill the intended purpose. Generally, economic coercion will remain to be a counterproductive policy too, despite sanctions being enacted to enhance human rights.
Effect of economic sanctions on average persons
Economic sanctions contribute to various adverse effects on the citizens other than the targeted individuals. They contributed to the escalated poverty gap, and deprived population sections experience the most impact. In most instances, sanctions do not attain the intended goals, and the elite group ultimately negotiate the severe impacts more than the more impoverished citizens. Economic sanctions are also seen as contributing significantly to a damaging impact on income disparity (Afesorgbor & Mahadevan, 2016). In this case, the ordinary individuals are impacted the most as opposed to the sanctioned leaders of a country. Further, sanctions substantially impact the standards of living and humanitarian conditions of the population in the country under sanction. Certain groups of the population, including minority communities, women, and other marginalized populations, experience more impact (Afesorgbor & Mahadevan, 2016). For example, when the poverty gap widens, the deprived sections of the population often feel the greatest impact. Sanctions also harm the non-industrialized and rural areas because the resources are shifted towards the production and power centers (Leyton-Brown, 2017). For instance, the sanctions imposed on Sudan have affected the aid process, which has resulted in declining in the aid received hence enhancing the level of poverty. As the economic wellbeing continues to decline, this results in the lack of opportunities and services, which is a serious issue mostly felt by the women in Sudan (Leyton-Brown, 2017).
Case Studies:
Case 1: United States embargo against Cuba
The US has imposed several embargoes on the same country in history, including a ban on the sale of a weapon to Cuba in 1958 as well as another on exports to Cuba except for medicine and food in 1960. The embargo comprises economic sanctions against Cuba as well as Cuban travel restrictions and commerce for all individuals and firms under the jurisdiction of the United States. The supporters of the embargo maintain that Cuba has failed to attain the conditions set by US administration for the sanction to be lifted. Some of the conditions include democracy transition and human rights improvements. On the other hand, the opponents maintain that the embargo should be lifted as it has failed to achieve the intended objectives. Besides, they argue that the sanction harms the economy of the US and the Cuban citizens. They also note that it prevents opportunities for promoting democracy and change in Cuba.
Case 2: Cote d’Ivoire Sanctions
Ivory Coast is one of the countries that suffer sanctions from the United States government due to violation of human rights. During the 1970s, Ivory Coast was home to the most robust economies of Africa due to the booming cocoa and coffee exports. Nevertheless, the country experienced a decline of its economy in the 1980s and 1990s, bringing about social issues that ultimately contributed to the eruption of civil war in 1999. As a result, the nation has been accused of human rights violations and hence led to the US government imposing sanctions that prohibit trade with individuals or organizations providing assistance or arms to Ivory Coast. Additionally, at the beginning of the century, the United Nations leveled sanctions against certain members of the group who significantly contributed to the conflict.
In 2010, the country carried an election where Alassane Ouattara was elected as president and was recognized by the international community as the new leader. However, Laurent Gbagbo, the incumbent, declined to give up the presidency. This resulted in the outbreak of a war that had ceased in 2007 (Vines, 2012). This led to more sanctions by the United States among other nations. This has a significant effect on the people more so those who were living in the commercial centers. This is due to the incumbent’s government being cut off from the central bank in the region. As a result, plenty of cash machines within the areas did not have money (Vines, 2012). Additionally, the banks limited the amount of money that an individual could withdraw. Additionally, the people experienced challenges in having their checks cleared as a result of the link to the regional banking system.
Globalization
Globalization refers to the process where organizations or businesses create global influence or begin to operate on a worldwide scale. Generally, globalization if aimed at benefitting personal economies across the world through enhancing market efficiency, escalating levels of competition, equally spread of wealth, and restricting military conflicts. Globalization contributes to economic growth in various ways, including Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), which usually tends to escalate the percentage of prosperity in international dealings, which positively enhances the transfer of technology, restructuring of the industry as well as the growth of foreign firms. Secondly, globalization enhances technological innovation, which escalates the level of competition and hence stimulating the development of technology. Finally, globalization leads to economies of scale among the large companies and thus contributing to cost reduction and lowering prices of goods and services. This eventually enhances the growth of the economy, even though it may hurt the small domestic firms.
The question of whether globalization escalates the precession and efficacy of foreign policy tools, mixed answers will arise. When economic globalization is viewed as escalating economic interdependence of national economies globally via rapid movement of service, goods, capital, and technology across national boundaries, more interdependence leads to numerous outcomes. Nations are likely to cooperate more on the global economic setting and hence to offer opportunities to leverage their influence towards the target nations. Nevertheless, a more complicated system offers evasion opportunities. Generally, economic globalization contributes to increases possibility of more efficacy of foreign policy tools. However, it can also lead to a nuanced system that may suffer from exploitation via nontraditional systems of banking and other measures. The precision also produces a situation where the domestic population faces adverse effects due to the increases in levels of prices.
In the age of globalization, the benefits of economic sanctions is a heavily debated subject. On the one hand, the concept of globalization leads to interdependence amongst the countries, which increases their vulnerability to the impact of sanctions. On the other hand, globalization creates new pathways through which a country can trade (Drezner, 2015). As a result, when a country is closed off in one country, it can easily shift its trading with another partner or market. As of the moment, the United States has an extensive advantage regarding the application of economic pressure on its adversaries and also its partners in efforts to achieve its national goals. This is attributed to its immense economy as well as its position within the global economy. This enables the country to have to sanction principles that are applied to the lesser countries. As such, globalization provides a leveled ground where both developed and developing countries co-exist (Drezner, 2015). Therefore, with respect to the subject of economic sanctions, the developing nations are at a disadvantage. This is because they lack the economic capacity that can compare to that of the developed nations. The issue can be viewed in the sense that, at no point in history will developing nations sanction developed nations (Drezner, 2015). Additionally, these economic sanctions affect the economic wellbeing of the affected countries, which affects the ability of the nation to catch up with others or interferes with the efforts invested in growing the economy. This is an indication that, to a greater extent, globalization is a problem to economic sanctions.
Conclusion and recommendations
While the economic sanctions can prove to be effective in deterring some given behaviors, it has been established to fail often to attain the intended effect, and hence generate a different unintended impact. Economic sanction has the potential of impacting the citizens of the targeted nation negatively. Besides, sanctions also deteriorate the relations between the involved nations. As a result, the international community faces ethical considerations, especially with the effect of the sanctions on the citizenry. While there are instances where economic sanctions realize the intended purpose, in most cases, they exacerbate the problem they are attempting to rectify.
The increased concerns of the impact of sanctions have attracted views of coming up with alternative measures, especially peaceful approaches which protect the development of the economy of a sanctioned country. This is because a significant ethical question results from the application of even tighter economic sanctions that challenge the citizens’ human rights within the country. This creates the need to re-evaluate the international security interests and also human rights. The need for an alternative approach results from the extent to which the US applies the sanctions. For example, looking at the situation between the United States and North Korea, whereby challenges and threats have persisted, there is a need to determine alternative measures to deal with the country because the prosperity and security of the region are of great importance. There are two ways through which to approach the issue with North Korea (Haggard & Noland, 2017). In this case, peaceful negotiations are viable as they will provide a basis upon which south and North Korea can communicate and come to terms. This indicates that dialogues may be a better option for countries where economic sanctions have failed to have the intended results. Also, the United States can formally recognize North Korea as a legitimate government (Haggard & Noland, 2017). Given that North Korea has continued to stand its ground. This indicates that the international community needs to evaluate its stance recognize North Korea hence reduce the tension within the region.