The DOI matches its Crossref record.
How not to sanction
Abstract
In the past century economic sanctions have emerged as a prominent ‘off the shelf’ tool of diplomacy. This article examines two of the most high-profile failures in the history of economic sanctions: the United Nations sanctions against Iraq between the two Gulf wars, and the Trump administration's re-imposition of sanctions on Iran beginning in 2018. The technology of economic statecraft changed considerably between these two cases, indicating significant policy learning. In both instances, however, the sanctions imposed crippling costs on the target state without any observable concessions. In neither case was the primary goal achieved, and the negative policy externalities were considerable. An autopsy of these failures reveals three cautionary warnings. First, the recipe for sanctions success is not merely a function of the ability to impose costs on the target state. Second, an underappreciated impediment to the successful use of economic statecraft is a failure to articulate clear and consistent demands. Third, tight linkages between scholars and policy-makers can lead to improved policies in the short term, but long-term political imperatives within great powers can pervert such successes.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Therefore, the instrumental justification of sanctions is flawed for states in that the probability of failure or eliciting unwanted outcomes is high.23”
From Sanctions and Postcolonial Statecraft in Iran: Resisting the Iran Libya Sanctions Act and Beyond (2024) · cites this paper as [23]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sanctions and Postcolonial Statecraft in Iran: Resisting the Iran Libya Sanctions Act and Beyond
Thomas, A. (2024) · All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace · doi:10.20991/allazimuth.1511004 · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Drezner, D. W.
- Corresponding author
- Drezner, Daniel W.
- ORCID
- Drezner, Daniel W.
- Venue
- International Affairs
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2022-09
- Volume
- 98
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1533-1552
- ISSN
- 0020-5850 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2346
- OpenAlex
- W4313143349
- Cited by
- 39
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 5.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- International Affairs (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic Sanctions and International Relations
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › COVID-19, Geopolitics, Technology, Migration
- Keywords
- economic sanctions, sanctions against Iran, economic statecraft, policy learning, great power politics, Gulf War
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review