Search

Begin New Search Topic Sanctions Political Geography Europe

31. Russia's Punitive Trade Policy Measures towards Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia

Author:
Michael Emerson, Denis Cenusa, Tamara Kovziridse, and Veronika Movchan
Publication Date:
09-2014
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for European Policy Studies
Abstract:
While EU and US sanctions against Russia over its aggression in Ukraine, and Russia's counter-sanctions, are much discussed due to their evident political significance, less attention has been given to Russia's punitive sanctions against the three Eastern European states – Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia – that have signed with the EU Association Agreements (AA), which include Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) provisions. This paper therefore documents these trade policy restrictions and embargoes imposed by Russia, and provides some first indications of their impact. The immediate impact on trade flows, especially for agri-food products, has been substantial, albeit with some leakage through Belarus. The main instrument for the Russian measures has been allegations of non-conformity with Russian technical standards, although the correlation of these allegations with movements in Russia's geopolitical postures makes it obvious that the Russian technical agencies are following political guidelines dressed up as scientific evidence. These measures also push the three states into diversifying their trade marketing efforts in favour of the EU and other world markets, with Georgia already having taken significant steps in this direction, since in its case the Russian sanctions date back to 2006. In the case of Ukraine, Russia's threat to cancel CIS free trade preferences infiltrated trilateral talks between the EU, Ukraine and Russia, leading on 12 September to their proposed postponement until the end of 2015 of the 'provisional' implementation of a large part of the AA/DCFTA. This was immediately followed on 16 September by ratification of the AA/DCFTA by both the Rada in Kyiv and the European Parliament, which will lead to its full and definitive entry into force when the 28 EU member states have also ratified it. However Putin followed the day after with a letter to Poroshenko making an abusive interpretation of the 12 September understanding.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, Power Politics, and Sanctions
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia

32. Claims to Legitimacy Matter: Why Sanctions Fail to Instigate Democratization in Authoritarian Regimes

Author:
Christian von Soest and Julia Grauvogel
Publication Date:
10-2013
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Global and Area Studies
Abstract:
International sanctions have been one of the most commonly used tools of Western foreign policy in the post‐Cold War era to instigate democratization globally. However, despite long‐term external pressure through sanctions imposed by the European Union, the United States and/or the United Nations, nondemocratic rule in cases such as Belarus, Cuba, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea and Syria has proven to be extremely persistent. In this paper, we analyze a new global dataset on sanctions from 1990 to 2011 and assess which international and domestic factors account for the persistence of nondemocratic rule in targeted regimes. The results of a fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) of 120 episodes of sanctions provide new insights for the research on both sanctions and authoritarian regimes. Most significantly, sanctions strengthen nondemocratic rule if the regime manages to incorporate their existence into its legitimation strategy. Such a “rally‐round‐the‐flag” effect occurs most often in cases where comprehensive sanctions targeting the entire population are imposed on regimes that enjoy strong claims to legitimacy and have only limited linkages to the sanction sender.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Democratization, Governance, and Sanctions
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, North Korea, United Nations, and Syria

33. How EU sanctions work: a new narrative

Author:
Francesco Giumelli
Publication Date:
05-2013
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Union Institute for Security Studies
Abstract:
The European Union has devoted growing attention to sanctions since the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty.1 In total, the Council has imposed Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) sanctions targeting countries, economic sectors, groups, individuals and entities on 27 different occasions. The novelty in the area of sanctions is that targets are not only states, as in the recent cases of Iran and Syria, but they are also individuals and non-state entities, e.g. anti-terrorist lists, President Robert Mugabe and his associates, and several companies connected with the military junta in Burma/Myanmar. Additionally, the contexts in which sanctions are utilised can be diverse, ranging from the protection of human rights to crisis management and non-proliferation. Despite the fact that the effectiveness of sanctions has been much debated, the EU has developed a sanctioning policy and intensified its adoption of sanctions. Sanctions were traditionally seen as a way to impose economic penalties as a means of extracting political concessions from targets, but EU sanctions do not always impose a cost nor do they always seek to induce behavioural change. To this extent, a new narrative may be needed.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, Human Rights, International Cooperation, International Law, and Sanctions
Political Geography:
Europe, Burma, and Myanmar

34. Oil sanctions on Iran: Cracking under pressure?

Publication Date:
12-2012
Content Type:
Working Paper
Abstract:
In 2012 Western sanctions on the Islamic Republic of Iran's oil and gas industry, aimed at putting economic pressure on it to change its nuclear policy, have reached an unprecedented level. Since the Iranian revolution in 1979, Iran has been in a state of hostility with the US, and has had cool relations, at best, with most European states. Sanctions against official Iranian financial institutions, individuals associated with the Islamic Republic and organisations suspected of being involved in nuclear proliferation activities have been mounting for some time. However, it is only recently that Iran's oil and gas sector has been specifically targeted by both the US and the EU in such a co-ordinated manner. Importantly, this marks the first time since the foundation of the Islamic Republic of Iran that the EU member states have collectively put in place sanctions on the export of Iranian crude oil—until now an action that, with a few exceptions, had only been taken by the US. The stakes have therefore been raised in Iran's confrontation with Western powers over the nuclear issue.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, Islam, Oil, and Sanctions
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Iran, and Middle East

35. How Verbal Threats to Close Oil Transit Chokepoints Lead to Military Conflict

Author:
John Bowlus
Publication Date:
01-2012
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Global Political Trends Center
Abstract:
On December 26, 2011, in response to US, European, and potential Asian sanctions on Iranian oil exports, the government in Tehran issued a threat to “cut off the Strait of Hormuz.” The US Defense Department responded that any blockade of the strait would be met with force. On first read, it is easy to dismiss such saber rattling as another chapter in the new Cold War in the Middle East between Iran and its allies – including Syria, Hamas, and Hezbollah – and the US, Israel, and the Sunni Gulf States, mostly notably Saudi Arabia. Iran has since backed away from its threat, but the event still carries importance because it is unclear how both the US and Iran will continue to respond, particularly as the diplomatic and economic pressures grow more acute while Iran's controversial nuclear program advances. Could such a verbal threat by Iran to cut off the Strait of Hormuzignite a military conflagration in the region? The relationship between military conflict and oil supply disruptions is well established; however, policymakers and analysts tend to focus on the incidents in which military conflict causes disruptions in oil supplies and sharp increases in prices. The first and most obvious example of this dynamic was the Arab-Israeli War of 1973. The subsequent oil embargo by the Arab members of the Organization for Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) against the United States and the Netherlands for their support of Israel caused prices to soar as oil-consuming nations endured supply shortages. The Iranian Revolution from 1978 to 1979 was another event that curtailed Western nations' access to oil and caused prices to spike. When thinking about the relationship between military conflict and oil supply disruptions, however, policymakers and analysts should also recognize that the competition over oil – and even verbal threats to disrupt oil supplies by closing oil transit chokepoints – have either led directly to military conflict or have provided a useful cover under which countries have initiated military conflict. By examining past episodes when countries issued threats to close oil transit chokepoints, this Policy Brief helps illuminate the dangers associated with the current crisis over the Strait of Hormuz.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Economics, and Sanctions
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Middle East, Asia, and Arabia

36. Using US Strategic Reserves to Moderate Potential Oil Price Increases from Sanctions on Iran

Author:
Philip K. Verleger
Publication Date:
02-2012
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
The United States has initiated new sanctions against Iran aimed at preventing it from collecting revenue from exports of crude oil. The European Union has followed, embargoing all imports of Iranian crude from July 1, 2012 and preventing any firms from entering into new contracts to import Iranian oil after January 23, 2012. The new US and EU sanctions could be the most draconian in many years. If implemented fully, US sanctions would force trading partners to choose between the United States and Iran. EU sanctions would cut Iran off from an important market. These sanctions, while reducing Iranian income, could pose a very serious economic threat to countries that have significant trade with the United States and/or import significant quantities of oil from Iran.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Foreign Policy, International Trade and Finance, Markets, Oil, and Sanctions
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Iran, and Middle East

37. European Minority Rights Law: Unilateral Legislation in Favour of Kin-Minorities

Author:
Tove H. Malloy
Publication Date:
07-2012
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
European Centre for Minority Issues
Abstract:
The international approach to unilateral legislation with extraterritorial reach is quite clear. General principles of customary international law entrust the state where national minorities reside with the task of securing the rights of all persons within its jurisdiction. Preferential treatment of national minorities by their kin-state is considered the exception unless it is established through bilateral treaties, or as a minimum agreed among the parties involved. The League of Nations system was the first European multilateral attempt to provide protection for minorities outside the mother state through bilateral treaties. After the collapse of the League of Nations system and the transfer of international protection of minorities to the United Nations system, bilateralism was not specifically promoted but nonetheless carried over as the main approach to kin-minority protection. This approach came under pressure after 1989 and the collapse of Communism when a number of countries adopted unilateral laws on kin-state minorities and compatriots living abroad. The bilateral approach received renewed attention, therefore, as part of the multilateral approach promoted by the international community after 1989.
Topic:
Human Rights, International Law, Governance, Sanctions, and Minorities
Political Geography:
Europe and United Nations

38. Eritrea: The Siege State

Publication Date:
09-2010
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Crisis Group
Abstract:
Eritrea has been deeply troubled since independence in 1991. Following the devastating war with Ethiopia (1998-2000), an authoritarian, militarised regime has further tightened political space, tolerating neither opposition nor dissent. Relations are difficult with the region and the wider international community. At African Union (AU) behest, the UN Security Council imposed sanctions in 2009 for its support of the Somali Islamic insurgency. It has become, in effect, a siege state, whose government is suspicious of its own population, neighbours and the wider world. Economically crippled at birth, it is a poor country from which tens of thousands of youths are fleeing, forming large asylum-seeking communities in Europe and North America. But Eritrea is an extreme reflection of its region's rough political environment, not its sole spoiler. More effort to understand the roots of its suspicions and greater engagement rather than further isolation would be a more promising international prescription for dealing with the genuine risks it represents.
Topic:
Islam, United Nations, Insurgency, Fragile/Failed State, and Sanctions
Political Geography:
Africa, Europe, North America, Ethiopia, and Eritrea

39. Patterns of Implementation: Do Listing Practices Impede Compliance with UN Sanctions? A Critical Assessment

Author:
David Cortright
Publication Date:
12-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Fourth Freedom Forum
Abstract:
The salience of the due process issue varies considerably among states. Concerns are highest among European states that are constitutionally and politically bound to the enforcement of rigorous human rights standards. Many of these states also have concerns about broader UN reform issues related to the representativeness of the Security Council and the legitimacy of its working methods. For other states the controversy over due process reinforces a general skepticism about sanctions, and may serve as an excuse for inaction.
Topic:
United Nations, Sanctions, Policy Implementation, and UN Security Council
Political Geography:
Europe and Global Focus

40. Between a Rock and a Hard Place: How the US-EU Battle over Article 98 Played Out in Croatia and Macedonia

Author:
Kristina Balalovska and Mieczyslaw P. Boduszynski
Publication Date:
09-2003
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Wilson Center
Abstract:
In the first half of 2003, postcommunist East European countries became pawns in two disputes between the European Union (EU) and the United States (US). The first, broadly covered by the Western media, was the clash over the US-led invasion of Iraq. The second was over the jurisdiction of the newly established International Criminal Court (ICC). Although the latter skirmish was less noticed in the wider world, it was in many ways the more significant of the two. In both cases, the small states of East and Central Europe were forced to choose between the conflicting demands of the EU and US. Unlike the battle over the Iraq war, EU member states were united on the point of not granting the US immunity in the ICC. Moreover, it was impossible to walk a tightrope between Europe and the US in the ICC case because it required decisive action, whereas on the question of whether or not to invade Iraqi, some postcommunist countries were able to lend tacit support to both sides. Finally, a lot more was at stake in the ICC issue, since both the US and the EU threatened defecting countries with concrete sanctions.
Topic:
Government, International Organization, Politics, War, and Sanctions
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Europe, and Macedonia