Fact Check: "Sanctions can be used as a tool for foreign policy."
What We Know
Sanctions have a long history as a tool of foreign policy, particularly for the United States. They are often employed to coerce governments into changing their policies or behaviors. According to a report by EconoFact, the use of economic sanctions has surged dramatically, increasing over nine-fold from 2000 to 2021, indicating their growing role in addressing national security and foreign policy challenges (EconoFact).
Sanctions can be effective in certain contexts. For instance, during the lead-up to the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference, the U.S. withheld loan guarantees to Israel, which pressured the Israeli government to attend the conference, ultimately contributing to the Oslo Peace Accords (EconoFact). However, the effectiveness of sanctions varies widely; studies suggest that sanctions achieve their intended goals in about 34% of cases (EconoFact).
Furthermore, sanctions can serve multiple purposes, including deterrence and signaling. For example, the exclusion of Russian banks from the SWIFT payment system aimed not only to weaken Russia's economy but also to signal to other nations the potential costs of violating international norms (EconoFact).
However, sanctions can also have unintended consequences, such as strengthening the targeted regime or harming the civilian population more than the intended targets. In the case of Iran, sanctions have reportedly bolstered the regime while impoverishing the middle class, which is often seen as a potential force for change (Johns Hopkins University).
Analysis
The claim that sanctions can be used as a tool for foreign policy is supported by a substantial body of evidence. The historical context and statistical data indicate that sanctions are frequently employed by governments, particularly the U.S., as a preferred alternative to military action. The increase in the use of sanctions, as noted in the EconoFact report, aligns with a broader trend in international relations where economic measures are favored for their perceived lower risk compared to military interventions (EconoFact).
However, the effectiveness of sanctions is a contentious topic. While some experts argue that sanctions can achieve specific foreign policy objectives, others contend that they often fail to produce the desired outcomes, sometimes exacerbating the very issues they aim to resolve. For instance, the findings from the book "How Sanctions Work: Iran and the Impact of Economic Warfare" suggest that sanctions on Iran have had the opposite effect of strengthening the regime while harming the middle class (Johns Hopkins University). This highlights a critical aspect of sanctions: their impact can vary significantly based on the political and economic context of the targeted country.
The reliability of sources discussing sanctions is generally high, particularly when they come from established academic institutions or non-partisan research organizations. However, it is essential to consider potential biases, especially in politically charged discussions about countries like Iran and Russia, where narratives may be influenced by geopolitical interests.
Conclusion
The verdict on the claim that "sanctions can be used as a tool for foreign policy" is True. The evidence shows that sanctions are indeed utilized by governments, particularly the U.S., as a strategic tool to influence foreign policy. While their effectiveness can vary and may lead to unintended consequences, their role as a foreign policy instrument is well-documented and increasingly prevalent in international relations.
