Debate Of The Week: Are Sanctions the Answer?
SERIES: http://theurbn.com/tag/debate-of-the-week
The UN estimates that at least 3,500 Syrians have been murdered since the March protests began against President Bashar al-Assad. The violent response to these uprisings has led to 37 more deaths this week alone. Arab League minsters are amidst intense discussions on whether to expel Syria with increasing pressure imposed on the EU to widen its economic sanctions against the regime. However: do economic sanctions work?
Source: Reuters
It is a powerful way of showing that such violent actions will not be tolerated. The UN sanctions against Iran in recent years have sent a potent message that its actions were not accepted by the international community. Likewise, sanctions proved to be a strong driving force in ending apartheid in South Africa when implemented in the 1980s.
They are a more peaceful alternative to military action. Diplomat Sir Jeremy Greenstock, previous UN Ambassador, claims that “there is nothing else between words and military action if you want to bring pressure upon a government.” It is, furthermore a more diplomatic route keeping channels open with countries rather than simply isolating them.
They are not a quick fix. It to almost 30 years from the first UN sanctions in 1962 to Nelson Mandela’s release from prison in 1990. People must be patient and realise that although they make take time to take effect they are a viable tools of foreign policy.
The sanctions will not make a difference. For governments that are willing to murder its own people as a means of dealing with conflict, sanctions will rarely achieve their political objective as we have seen in the case of North Korea, Cuba, Burma and Zimbabwe to name a few.
The can cause more harm than good. Sanctions can hurt innocent people. A 1999 study of the Cold War portrays that sanctions contributed to more deaths than “all weapons of mass destruction” used throughout history. Louis Kreisberg, a social conflict analyst explains that they “widen the conflict, add to its destructiveness and sometimes prolong it.”
They can be used by dictators as an effective propoganda tool. In the past we have seen how economic sanctions can be used as a scapegoat for problems such as Fidel Castro endeavoured to do for years. By increasing a nation’s isolation, sanctions make it easier to blame outsiders for a country’s suffering.
Have your say in the comments’ section below.
This week’s debate has been provided by our partners at In-Debate, view the debate in its entirety here and for others go to www.in-debate.com. Or follow on Facebook and Twitter.
I think there needs to be a combination of sanctions and help. With only a stick that really only hurts the poor it's impossible to force change. There needs to be help in promoting change at all levels. Effectively carrot and a stick.
sanctions only work on a short term basis. however in the long run sanctions dont work. especially in countries that are run on a dictatorship regime. countries who input sanctions need to look at how they run their countries. countries who impose sanctions are indirect hypocrites.
[...] Last week’s debate: Are Sanctions the Answer? [...]
[...] opting for a more surgical approach to sanctions, the NUS are evidently seeking to give credence to the main argument often propagated in favour of [...]