Content deleted Content added
Itzybella8 (talk | contribs) m →Diplomatic sanctions: circular link |
Aadirulez8 (talk | contribs) m v2.05 - Auto / Fix errors for CW project (Link equal to linktext) |
||
| (14 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
Line 3:
'''International sanctions''' are political and economic decisions that are part of diplomatic efforts by [[countries]], [[United Nations Security Council|multilateral]] or [[regional organization]]s against states or organizations either to protect national security interests, or to protect international law, and defend against threats to international peace and security.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Economic Sanctions Reconsidered|last=Hufbauer|first=Gary|publisher=Peterson Institute for International Economics|year=2007|isbn=978-088132-407-5|location=Washington, DC|pages=[https://archive.org/details/economicsanction0000unse/page/5 5]|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/economicsanction0000unse/page/5}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|title=The sanctions decade : assessing UN strategies in the 1990s|author=Cortright, David|date=2000|publisher=Lynne Rienner Publishers|others=Lopez, George A.|isbn=1555878911|location=Boulder, Colo.|pages=1|oclc=43115210}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Sanctions policy |url=https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage/423/sanctions-policy_en |website=European External Action Service }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Assembly of the African Union Fourteenth Ordinary Session |url=https://au.int/en/decisions-102 |website=African Union }}</ref> These decisions principally include the temporary imposition on a target of economic, trade, diplomatic, cultural or other restrictions (sanctions measures) that are lifted when the motivating security concerns no longer apply, or when no new threats have arisen.
According to [[Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter]], only the [[United Nations Security Council|UN Security Council]] has a mandate by the international community to apply sanctions (Article 41) that must be complied with by all [[Member states of the United Nations|UN member states]] (Article 2,2). They serve as the international community's most powerful peaceful means to prevent threats to international peace and security or to settle them. Sanctions do not include the use of military force. However, if sanctions do not lead to the diplomatic settlement of a conflict, the [[Use of force in international law|use of force]] can be authorized by the Security Council separately under Article 42.
UN sanctions should not be confused with unilateral sanctions that are imposed by individual countries in furtherance of their strategic interests.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The evolution of UN sanctions : from a tool of warfare to a tool of peace, security and human rights|last=Enrico|first=Carisch|publisher=Springer|others=Rickard-Martin, Loraine,, Meister, Shawna R.|year=2017|isbn=9783319600048|location=Cham, Switzerland|pages=454 ff|oclc=1008962905}}</ref> Typically intended as strong economic coercion, measures applied under unilateral sanctions can range between coercive diplomatic efforts, economic warfare, or as preludes to war.
For the first 45 years of the [[United Nations]]' history, sanctions were only imposed twice: once against [[Rhodesia]] in 1966 and then against [[South Africa]] in 1977.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Cortright |first1=David |title=The Sanctions Decade |last2=Lopez |first2=George |year=2000 |publisher=Lynne Rienner Publishers |isbn=9781555878672}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite journal |last=Weiss |first=Thomas G. |date=1999 |title=Sanctions as a Foreign Policy Tool: Weighing Humanitarian Impulses |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/424530 |journal=Journal of Peace Research |volume=36 |issue=5 |pages=499–509 |doi=10.1177/0022343399036005001 |jstor=424530 |issn=0022-3433}}</ref> From 1991, there was a sharp increase in their usage.<ref>Hufbauer, Gary, Jeffrey Schott, Kimberly Elliott, and Barbara Oegg. (2007) Economic Sanctions Reconsidered, 3rd edn. Washington: Institute for International Economics.</ref> The UN voted for sanctions twelve times in the 1990s alone.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |last=Drezner |first=Daniel W. |date=2011 |title=Sanctions Sometimes Smart: Targeted Sanctions in Theory and Practice |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/23016144 |journal=International Studies Review |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=96–108 |doi=10.1111/j.1468-2486.2010.01001.x |jstor=23016144 |issn=1521-9488}}</ref> According to [[Thomas G. Weiss]], the soar in sanctions can be attributed to the shift in attitudes as a consequence of the end of the [[Cold War]], where there was a "newfound willingness" from [[Member states of the United Nations|UN member nations]] to "intrude in issues that were once off-limits".<ref name=":2" />
===Reasons for sanctioning===▼
Sanctions formulations are designed into three categories. The categories are used to differentiate between the political contexts due to the global nature of the act.▼
The first category involves such sanctions that are designed to force cooperation with [[international law]].<ref name="jstor27800499">{{cite journal |last1=Chesterman |first1=Simon |last2=Pouligny |first2=Béatrice |title=Are Sanctions Meant to Work? The Politics of Creating and Implementing Sanctions Through the United Nations |journal=Global Governance |date=2003 |volume=9 |issue=4 |pages=503–518 |doi=10.1163/19426720-00904008 |jstor=27800499 |s2cid=151063307 }}</ref> This can be seen in the sanctions placed on [[Iraq]] in [[United Nations Security Council Resolution 661|Resolution 661]] on August 6, 1990, after the initial invasion of neighboring Kuwait. The United Nations placed an [[embargo]] on the nation in an attempt to prevent armed conflict. Resolution 665 and Resolution 670 were further added creating both naval and air blockade on Iraq.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Schweisfurth |first1=Theodor |title=The Acceptance by the Soviet Union of the Compulsory Jurisdiction of the ICJ for Six Human Rights Conventions |journal=European Journal of International Law |date=1 January 1991 |volume=2 |issue=1 |pages=110–117 |doi=10.1093/ejil/2.1.110 }}</ref> The purpose of the initial sanctions was to coerce Iraq into following international law, which included the recognized sovereignty of Kuwait.▼
The second category of design is those sanctions with the purpose to contain a threat to peace within a geographical boundary.<ref name="jstor27800499" /> The 2010 Iran nuclear proliferation debate is a contemporary example. The current United Nations Security Council passed on June 9, Resolution 1929 providing restrictions on missile and weaponry materials that could be used for the creation of destructive weapons.<ref>"Should the [[United Nations Security Council]] Impose Additional Sanctions on Iran Due to Its Nuclear Program?" CONS. (2010). International Debates, 8(9), 41–48.</ref>{{unreliable source?|date=May 2020}} This principle of restriction is to contain the possibility of Iranian aggression within the neighboring region.▼
The third category involves the United Nations Security Councils condemnation of actions of a specific action or policy of a member/non-member nation.<ref name="jstor27800499" /> The white minority declared Rhodesian Independence on November 11, 1965.<ref name="jstor2197519">{{cite journal |last1=McDougal |first1=Myres S. |last2=Reisman |first2=W. Michael |title=Rhodesia and the United Nations: The Lawfulness of International Concern |journal=The American Journal of International Law |date=January 1968 |volume=62 |issue=1 |pages=1–19 |doi=10.2307/2197519 |jstor=2197519 |s2cid=145393323 |url=https://openyls.law.yale.edu/bitstream/20.500.13051/1906/2/Rhodesia_and_the_United_Nations___The_Lawfulness_of_International_Concern.pdf }}</ref> The General assemble and United Nations in a 107 to 2 vote took to condemning Rhodesia on all military, economic, as well as oil and petroleum products.<ref name="jstor2197519" /> The international display of disapproval forced sanctions onto the Rhodesian people, but without a clear goal as to a remedy for the economic sanctions.▼
The three categories are a blanket explanation on the reasons sanctions are applied to nations, but it does not go as far as to say that voting members share the same political reasons for imposing them. It is often the case for many nations to be driven by self-interests in one or more categories when voting on whether or not to implement sanctions.▼
=== Limitations of the United Nations Sanctioning ===▼
In scenarios where the Security Council's permanent members, the P5, with their vetoes prioritize their own interests at the expense of collective action, the UNSC's effectiveness can be significantly hampered.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Jeong |first=Jin Mun |last2=Peksen |first2=Dursun |date=January 2019 |title=Domestic Institutional Constraints, Veto Players, and Sanction Effectiveness |url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002717728105 |journal=Journal of Conflict Resolution |language=en |volume=63 |issue=1 |pages=194–217 |doi=10.1177/0022002717728105 |issn=0022-0027}}</ref> This is evident in cases like Syria, where Russia's consistent vetoes have shielded the Assad regime from sanctions despite documented war crimes.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Melling |first=Graham |last2=Dennett |first2=Anne |date=2017-12-01 |title=The Security Council veto and Syria: responding to mass atrocities through the “Uniting for Peace” resolution |url=https://doi.org/10.1007/s40901-018-0084-9 |journal=Indian Journal of International Law |language=en |volume=57 |issue=3 |pages=285–307 |doi=10.1007/s40901-018-0084-9 |issn=2199-7411 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Similarly, Western vetoes have protected Israel from censure for its actions in the occupied territories.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Newton |first=Creede |title=A history of the US blocking UN resolutions against Israel |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/5/19/a-history-of-the-us-blocking-un-resolutions-against-israel |access-date=2023-12-14 |website=Al Jazeera |language=en}}</ref>▼
This selective use of the veto power exposes a fundamental tension between national interests and international responsibility. While P5 members may argue that their actions are driven by strategic considerations, historical ties, or domestic pressures, the consequences can be felt by the civilian population.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Jong |first=Daniëlla Dam-de |date=2020-11-12 |title=Who Is Targeted by the Council’s Sanctions? The UN Security Council and the Principle of Proportionality |url=https://brill.com/view/journals/nord/89/3-4/article-p383_383.xml |journal=Nordic Journal of International Law |volume=89 |issue=3-4 |pages=383–398 |doi=10.1163/15718107-89030007 |issn=0902-7351 |doi-access=free |hdl-access=free |hdl=1887/3141734}}</ref> Impunity for human rights abuses breeds further conflict and undermines the UNSC's legitimacy as an impartial arbiter of global affairs. ▼
Therefore, it is crucial to acknowledge the limitations of the current system and explore potential solutions.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Member States Call for Removing Veto Power, Expanding Security Council to Include New Permanent Seats, as General Assembly Debates Reform Plans for 15-Member Organ {{!}} UN Press |url=https://press.un.org/en/2018/ga12091.doc.htm |access-date=2023-12-14 |website=press.un.org}}</ref> These could include reforming the veto power to require unanimity for its use, increasing transparency around veto justifications, or empowering regional organizations to play a more prominent role in conflict resolution. Ultimately, overcoming the shadow of self-interest within the UNSC is essential for ensuring its continued relevance and effectiveness in a world increasingly grappling with complex and interconnected challenges.▼
== Types ==
Line 55 ⟶ 37:
===Sanctions on individuals===
The United Nations Security Council can implement sanctions on political leaders or economic individuals. These persons usually find ways of evading their sanction because of political connections within their nation.<ref name="jstor27800499">{{cite journal |last1=Chesterman |first1=Simon |last2=Pouligny |first2=Béatrice |date=2003 |title=Are Sanctions Meant to Work? The Politics of Creating and Implementing Sanctions Through the United Nations |journal=Global Governance |volume=9 |issue=4 |pages=503–518 |doi=10.1163/19426720-00904008 |jstor=27800499 |s2cid=151063307}}</ref>
▲Sanctions formulations are designed into three categories. The categories are used to differentiate between the political contexts due to the global nature of the act.
It is sometimes claimed that sanctions imposed by single countries or by an intergovernmental body like the United Nations are "illegal" or "criminal" due to, in the case of economic sanctions, the [[right to development]] or, in the case of military sanctions, the [[Right of self-defense]].▼
▲The first category involves such sanctions that are designed to force cooperation with [[international law]].<ref name="jstor27800499"
A 1996 report by [[International Progress Organization]] criticized sanctions as "an illegitimate form of collective punishment of the weakest and poorest members of society, the infants, the children, the chronically ill, and the elderly".<ref>{{cite web|url = http://www.i-p-o.org/sanct.htm|title = Appeal against sanctions: Commission on Human Rights: Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, Forty-eighth session (5–30 August 1996). Agenda item 13: International peace and security as an essential condition for the enjoyment of human rights, above all the right to life|date = 15 August 1996}}</ref>▼
▲The second category of design is those sanctions with the purpose to contain a threat to peace within a geographical boundary.<ref name="jstor27800499" /> The 2010 Iran nuclear proliferation debate is a contemporary example. The current United Nations Security Council passed on June 9, Resolution 1929 providing restrictions on missile and weaponry materials that could be used for the creation of destructive weapons.<ref>"Should the [[United Nations Security Council]] Impose Additional Sanctions on Iran Due to Its Nuclear Program?" CONS. (2010). International Debates, 8(9), 41–48.</ref>{{unreliable source?|date=May 2020}} This principle of restriction is to contain the possibility of Iranian aggression within the neighboring region.
▲The third category involves the United Nations Security Councils condemnation of actions of a specific action or policy of a member/non-member nation.<ref name="jstor27800499" /> The white minority declared Rhodesian Independence on November 11, 1965.<ref name="jstor2197519">{{cite journal |last1=McDougal |first1=Myres S. |last2=Reisman |first2=W. Michael |date=January 1968 |title=Rhodesia and the United Nations: The Lawfulness of International Concern |url=https://openyls.law.yale.edu/bitstream/20.500.13051/1906/2/Rhodesia_and_the_United_Nations___The_Lawfulness_of_International_Concern.pdf |journal=The American Journal of International Law
▲The three categories are a blanket explanation on the reasons sanctions are applied to nations, but it does not go as far as to say that voting members share the same political reasons for imposing them. It is often the case for many nations to be driven by self-interests in one or more categories when voting on whether or not to implement sanctions.
Sanctions have long been the subject of controversy as scholars question their effects on citizens, the level of ethnocentrism involved when designing and implementing sanctions, and the possibility of ineffectiveness.
Line 72 ⟶ 60:
There are several ways to remove and dissolve sanctions that have been imposed on a nation(s). In some cases, such as those imposed on Iraq in 1990, only a new resolution can be used to lift the sanctions.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Lopez |first1=George A. |last2=Cortright |first2=David |title=Containing Iraq: Sanctions Worked |journal=Foreign Affairs |date=2004 |volume=83 |issue=4 |pages=90–103 |doi=10.2307/20034049 |jstor=20034049 }}</ref> This is done when no provision is put in the resolution for the lifting of sanctions. This is generally only done if the sanctioned party has shown willingness to adopt certain conditions of the Security Council.<ref name=jstor27800499/> Another way sanctions can be lifted is when time limits are implemented with the initial sanction. After an extended duration, the sanction will eventually be lifted off the nation, with or without cooperation. The practice of time limitations has grown over the years and allows for a gradual removal of restrictions on nations conforming, at least in part, to conditions imposed by sanctioning bodies, such as the U.N. Security Council.
== Criticism ==
▲It is sometimes claimed that sanctions imposed by single countries or by an intergovernmental body like the United Nations are "illegal" or "criminal" due to, in the case of economic sanctions, the [[right to development]] or, in the case of military sanctions, the [[Right of self-defense]].{{Citation needed|date=March 2024}}
Professor [[Thomas G. Weiss]] describes sanctions as giving nations the "ability to 'do something' and engage in cheap moralizing but refrain from serious engagement", denouncing them as moral posturing with little impact.<ref name=":2" /> Jovan Babic & Aleksandar Jokic also criticise sanctions, but argue that their impact is significant: "sanctions produce morally reprehensible consequences that undermine their often-cited moral justification".<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |last1=Babic |first1=Jovan |last2=Jokic |first2=Aleksandar |date=2000 |title=The Ethics of International Sanctions: The Case of Yugoslavia |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/45289098 |journal=The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs |volume=24 |issue=1 |pages=87–101 |jstor=45289098 |issn=1046-1868}}</ref>
=== Impact on civilians ===
▲A 1996 report by [[International Progress Organization]] criticized sanctions as "an illegitimate form of collective punishment of the weakest and poorest members of society, the infants, the children, the chronically ill, and the elderly".<ref>{{cite web |
A notable case of sanctions having a catastrophic impact on civilians is in [[Iraq]]. In the hopes of forcing [[Saddam Hussein]] to comply with requests to inspect Iraq's nuclear capability - or to invoke a [[Coup d'état|coup d'etat]] - the UN imposed sanctions against Iraq. As a consequence, the GDP was halved.<ref name=":1" /> The cost of food for a family increased by 25000% in the space of 5 years.<ref>Hoskins, Eric. (1997) Humanitarian Impacts of Sanctions and War in Iraq. In Political Gain and Civilian Pain, edited by Thomas Weiss, David Cortright, George Lopez, and Larry Minear, eds. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.</ref> Between 1991 and 1998, it has been estimated that the sanctions resulted in between 100,000 and 250,000 children to die.<ref>Garfield, Richard. (1999) Morbidity and Mortality Among Iraqi Children from 1990 Through 1998.</ref> Ultimately, the sanctions did not yield concessions from Hussain's government, and some academics use this case study to bring the efficacy of such sanctions into question.<ref name=":1" />
Some policymakers view the civilian impact as necessary. In the words of [[List of ambassadors of the United States to the United Nations|US ambassador to the UN]] [[Madeleine Albright]], "the price was worth it" (although in a 2020 interview she later retracted this statement as "totally stupid").<ref>{{Cite news |last=Oladipo |first=Gloria |date=2022-03-23 |title='A trailblazer': political leaders pay tribute to Madeleine Albright |url=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/mar/23/madeleine-albright-tributes-obama-bush-blair |access-date=2024-03-17 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}}</ref>
Some scholars also highlight the UN's [[International sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia|sanctions against former Yugoslavian republics]] from 1991 to 1995. In some ways, they could be considered a success as they prevented a wider conflict in Europe.<ref name=":2" /> However, the sanctions had catastrophic consequences. Less than a year after the first sanctions, average household income halved from $3,000/year to $1,500/year, according to estimates by economist [[Miroljub Labus]].<ref name="NYTzima92">{{cite news |author=Paul Lewis |date=October 29, 1992 |title=''Yugoslavs Face Hard Winter as the Blockade Bites'' |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/29/world/yugoslavs-face-hard-winter-as-the-blockade-bites.html |access-date=June 26, 2017 |newspaper=The New York Times |agency=[[The New York Times]]}}</ref> In October 1993, the office of the [[United Nations]] High Commissioner for Refugees in [[Belgrade]] estimated that approximately 3 million people living in [[Republic of Serbia (1992–2006)|Serbia]] and [[Republic of Montenegro (1992–2006)|Montenegro]] were living at or below the poverty line.<ref name="WPoct93">{{cite news |author=David B. Ottoway |date=October 20, 1993 |title=''SANCTIONS CRIPPLE SERBIA, BUT NOT ITS MONEY PRESSES'' |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1993/10/20/sanctions-cripple-serbia-but-not-its-money-presses/9f11b429-481f-40bc-9664-e1e8f4e41865/ |access-date=June 26, 2017 |agency=[[The Washington Post]]}}</ref> Vulnerable & sick people suffered the most, and by 1993 most hospitals lacked basic medicines such as [[Antibiotic|antibiotics]] and functioning equipment such as [[X-ray]] devices.<ref name="WPoct93" /> In November 1994, 87 patients died in [[Institute of Mental Health (Belgrade)|Belgrade's Institute of Mental Health]] due to lack of heat, food, or medicine.<ref name="Watkins">{{cite web |author=Thayer Watkins, Ph.D. |title=The Worst Episode of Hyperinflation in History: Yugoslavia 1993-94 |url=http://www.rogershermansociety.org/yugoslavia.htm |access-date=June 26, 2017}}</ref> In the same year, ''[[The New York Times]]'' reported that suicide rates had increased by 22%.<ref name="NYT94">{{cite news |author=Roger Cohen |date=May 29, 1994 |title=''Embargo Leaves Serbia Thriving'' |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1994/05/30/world/embargo-leaves-serbia-thriving.html?pagewanted=all |access-date=June 26, 2017 |newspaper=The New York Times |agency=[[The New York Times]]}}</ref>
At the 50th anniversary of the UN in January 1995, the incumbent [[Secretary-General of the United Nations|UN Secretary General]] [[Boutros Boutros-Ghali]] highlighted the negative effects of sanctions:
{{Quote|text="a blunt instrument [that raises] the ethical question of whether suffering inflicted on vulnerable groups in the target country is a legitimate means of exerting pressure on political leaders whose behaviour is unlikely to be affected by the plight of their subjects."|title=Boutros-Ghali, former UN Secretary General|source=}}
<ref>Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of the Organization, “Supplement to an Agenda for Peace: Position Paper of the Secretary-General on the Occasion of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the United Nations", 1 January 3, 1995, para. 70</ref>
Boutros-Ghali also highlighted the UN's duty of care to ensure that vulnerable groups are provided with humanitarian aid during the economic fallout of the sanctions they impose.<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |title=Boutros Boutros-Ghali on the Negative Effects of Sanctions |url=https://archive.globalpolicy.org/security-council/security-council-reform/32815-boutros-boutros-ghali-on-the-negative-effects-of-sanctions.html |access-date=2024-03-17 |website=archive.globalpolicy.org}}</ref>
=== Paternalism ===
[[Paternalism]] is the philosophy that one party is unaware of what is in their best interests, so another party must 'save' them, like a paternal father figure. This presupposes that the paternal party is superior, and that the party in need of intervention should not have autonomy over themselves, which should instead be given to the paternal party to act on their behalf. Jovan Babic & Aleksandar Jokic argue that sanctions are an act of paternalism.<ref name=":0" />
They contend that sanctions "reinforce the position that some nations are not "adult enough" "while other nations are authorized (perhaps bound by duty) to lend a helping hand."<ref name=":0" /> This, they believe, contradicts the liberal notion that all peoples and nations are created equal.<ref name=":0" /> Babic & Jokic further assert that this attitude results in the sanctioned population being portrayed as incompetent and infantile people undeserving of dignity who it is morally permissible to allow to suffer as a consequence of sanctions.<ref name=":0" />
=== Measuring success ===
Measuring the success of sanctions - and when they should be lifted - is often difficult.
[[Secretary-General of the United Nations|UN Secretary General]] [[Boutros Boutros-Ghali|Boutros-Ghali]] commented on the objectives of imposing sanctions can often be unclear and shift over time, making it "difficult to agree upon when the objectives can be considered to have been achieved and sanctions can be lifted".<ref name=":3" />
According to Thomas G. Weiss, the sanctions against the states of the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s could be considered a success as they prevented a wider conflict in Europe.<ref name=":2" /> Ultimately, the sanctions were lifted with the signing of the [[Dayton Agreement]] in 1995 which saw the end of combat.
▲In scenarios where the Security Council's permanent members, the P5, with their vetoes prioritize their own interests at the expense of collective action, the UNSC's effectiveness can be significantly hampered.<ref>{{Cite journal |
▲This selective use of the veto power exposes a fundamental tension between national interests and international responsibility. While P5 members may argue that their actions are driven by strategic considerations, historical ties, or domestic pressures, the consequences can be felt by the civilian population.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Jong |first=Daniëlla Dam-de |date=2020-11-12 |title=Who Is Targeted by the
▲Therefore, it is crucial to acknowledge the limitations of the current system and explore potential solutions.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Member States Call for Removing Veto Power, Expanding Security Council to Include New Permanent Seats, as General Assembly Debates Reform Plans for 15-Member Organ {{!}} UN Press |url=https://press.un.org/en/2018/ga12091.doc.htm |access-date=2023-12-14 |website=press.un.org}}</ref> These could include reforming the veto power to require unanimity for its use, increasing transparency around veto justifications, or empowering regional organizations to play a more prominent role in conflict resolution. Ultimately, overcoming the shadow of self-interest within the UNSC is essential for ensuring its continued relevance and effectiveness in a world increasingly grappling with complex and interconnected challenges.
==Sanctions databases==
Line 79 ⟶ 108:
* [[Autarky]]
* [[Boycott]]
* [[Cyber sanctions]]
* [[Enforcement]]
* [[Accountability]]
Line 94 ⟶ 124:
==Further reading==
* Condon, Bradly J, Environmental Sovereignty and the WTO : Trade Sanctions and International Law (2006)
* Ashouri, Mahan "The Role of transnational Private Actors in
==External links==
| |||