Sanctions as a Diplomatic Tool: A History of Failure and Civilian Suffering

 New York, – Sanctions have become a cornerstone of international diplomacy, often deployed as a non-military means to pressure nations into compliance or to avert war when military action is politically untenable. However, a growing body of evidence highlights their consistent failure to achieve political objectives while inflicting severe humanitarian costs on civilian populations, raising profound ethical questions about their use.

A 2023 UN report identifies the US, UK, EU, and Canada as “prolific” users of sanctions, frequently targeting entire economies with measures such as banking restrictions that impact whole populations. While sanctions are theoretically designed to influence political elites, history shows they often function as collective punishment, devastating ordinary citizens while leaving regimes largely unaffected. The UN Charter’s preamble commits to “the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples,” yet Article 41 empowers the UN Security Council (UNSC) to impose sanctions, including drastic measures like severing postal services, creating a stark contradiction in the organization’s mission.

The Human Toll of Sanctions

The historical record is replete with examples of sanctions causing widespread suffering. In Iraq, following its 1990 invasion of Kuwait, UNSC sanctions failed to oust Saddam Hussein or force withdrawal but led to catastrophic humanitarian consequences. UNICEF estimates that 500,000 children under five died due to sanctions, with other sources citing 570,000. By 2003, when the US and UK invaded Iraq without UN authorization—alleging weapons of mass destruction that were never found—sanctions had contributed to 1.5 million Iraqi deaths and long-term issues like malnutrition. Then-US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright infamously remarked in 1996 that the human cost was “worth it.”

Libya faced similar devastation under UNSC sanctions from 1992 to 2003, imposed to pressure the Gaddafi regime to hand over suspects in the 1988 Pan Am Flight 103 bombing. Measures included a complete air travel ban, asset freezes, and embargoes on medicine and food, severely impacting civilians. In Afghanistan, sanctions initiated in the 1990s under UNSC Resolution 1267 persisted after the Taliban’s 2021 return to power, with the US seizing $7 billion of Afghan central bank funds in 2022. These measures have crippled external aid, exacerbating the plight of a war-ravaged population without altering Taliban policies.

The Myth of “Smart” Sanctions

Proponents of sanctions often label them as “smart” or “targeted,” claiming they focus on political elites while sparing civilians. In reality, measures like asset freezes, travel bans, and economic boycotts inevitably affect broader populations. Russia, facing over 28,000 sanctions from Western nations following the Ukraine conflict’s escalation, exemplifies this disconnect. Despite bizarre bans—such as prohibiting Russian cats from international competitions, or restricting exports of grand pianos and Disney’s Turning Red—the sanctions have failed to topple President Vladimir Putin or significantly weaken Russia’s economy. Instead, they have disrupted the lives of ordinary Russians, with measures like the EU’s ban on Russian media, including RT, limiting access to alternative perspectives and contradicting Western claims of upholding free speech.

Sanctions as Collective Punishment

Israel’s ongoing siege on Gaza, intensified since October 2023, further illustrates the punitive nature of sanctions. Described as a blockade, Israel’s restrictions on essentials like fuel, water, and medicine have led to legal action at the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court, with Israeli leaders Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant indicated for war crimes. Even before the current conflict, Israel banned items like sewing machines and chocolate, citing security concerns, in a policy critics argue amounts to collective punishment.

A Tool of Western Hegemony

Sanctions often reflect Western dominance in global affairs, with the US leading their application over the past 50 years. Critics argue that sanctions serve as a slow-motion weapon of mass destruction, killing civilians gradually rather than instantly, as a bomb might. The UN’s authority under Article 41 to impose sanctions to maintain peace is increasingly questioned as these measures fail to achieve political goals while causing widespread suffering. As the international community grapples with the ethical implications, the overuse of sanctions by Western powers underscores a troubling paradox: tools meant to promote peace often deepen human misery, challenging the very principles of global governance.