Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Effects of sanctions
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Effects of sanctions
SHOULD ALL TRADE SANCTIONS BE STOPPED?
To most of the world, sanctions are a mixed blessing. On the one hand, they reinforce trade rules and promote respect for them. On the other hand, they tend to undermine the principles of free trade and provoke a kind of ‘trade envy’(Charnovitz) in other international organizations.
Trade retaliation goes back quite a ways; we see examples of it in much of US law:
-Antidumping Act of 1916, which has seen little use.(Charnovitz)
-International Labor Organization, from the Treaty of Versailles 1919, which served as an international dispute system, but no economic measures were ever recommended until 2000, against Burma.(Charnovitz)
-UN Security Council, which handles breaches of peace, only used sanctions 3 times between 1920-1990, but now uses them much more frequently.(Charnovitz)
To understand the difficulty I have agreeing with the suggestion that all trade sanctions must be stopped, I feel it is important to discuss some of the good, the bad, and the ugly involved with imposing sanctions. I’ll start my discussion with some of the good that comes from restricting trade, move into some of the negative affects, and summarize with improvements I feel could be made to this defunct system.
The first advantage that comes to mind about imposing trade sanctions would have to be the ability of the sanctioning government to let everyone know how pissed they are, make their own people relatively happy, and then move on. Although this may only be temporary.(Charnovitz)
Individual countries, especially major world powers, like to impose trade sanctions even when the probability of forcing a change in the target country’s policy is small. In addition to indicating a resolution and suggesting their disapproval to the direct wrong doer and to other countries, politicians may also want to pose for their own people.(Library of Economics) If you look at the example of the US, European, and British sanctions against South Africa as well as US, European, and Japanese sanctions against China in the wake of the Tiananmen Square massacre, you can see that these were specifically designed to put their own citizens at ease, to make a moral and historical statement, and to send a warning to f...
... middle of paper ...
...t be a common ground. There are different circumstances for every case brought forth, some where sanctions seem to be the only course of action, and some where they seem to be the worst course of action. We need to learn how to take this effective bargaining tool, and use it to better our global trading community.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Chanovitz, Steve Rethinking WTO Trade Sanctions Social Science Research Network http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=256952 Elliott, Kimberly Evidence on the Costs and Benefits of Economic Sanctions Institute for International Economics http://www.iie.com/publications/papers/elliott1097.htm Library of Economics Lookup = Sanctions http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Sanctions.html Schooland, Ken International Trade and Finance HPU Economics 3400, Lecture/Video on Panama.
Weiss, Stanley A. Trade Sanctions are a Misused Tool International Herald Tribune Saturday, June 26, 1999
Yang, Jaiwan; Teegan, Hildy Both are Associate Professors for the Department of International Business at George Washington University US Economic Sanctions and Globalization: Economic Impact and Policy Implications
http://www.gwu.edu
Office of Industries, U.S. International Trade Commission.(2009).Export controls: an overview of their use, economic effects, and treatment in the global trading system. Retrieved from United States International Trade Commission http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/working_papers/ID-23.pdf
Is the Cuban Embargo a cruel reminder of the Cold war, or is it an important factor of American Democracy fighting the spread of Communism? The Cuban Embargo was a declaration issued by American President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. The embargo was issued because of the threat that the Communist government of Cuba, led by Fidel Castro in 1959, had on American security, assets and democracy at the height of the Cold War. Some 1.8 billion worth of industrial assets were lost with Cuban communist nationalization. (Mr. D’Angelo personal interview) In support, constant influence of the Soviet Union during the early 1960s, particularly the time between 1961 and 1962, led to the creation of the embargo. In addition, the Soviet Union had planned to build a missile base on the island, which drove the Cold War to its height and made nuclear destruction a real possibility. Consequently, The Embargo called for total economic sanctions for Cuba and the institution of a blockade around the island, as shown by the seven-day stand off that followed the embargo with the USSR. Unfortunately, this blockade completely restricted any trade to foreign countries and even restricted travel to and from the island. The shattering of The USSR, or Soviet Union, should have called for the end of the embargo, but instead the federal government, in 1992, further restricted the embargo with the 1992 Cuba Democracy Act and the 1996 Helms-Burton Act. The Cuban Democracy Act was a bill presented by U.S. Congressman Robert Torricelli and passed in 1992, which prohibited foreign-based subsidiaries of U.S. companies from trading with Cuba, travel to Cuba by U.S citizens, and family remittances to Cuba (Lee). Most importantly, the Helms-Burton Act extended the territoria...
To achieve societal welfare, I shall utilize the criterion of national security. I will define national security as the government’s obligation to protect its citizens. It is in this way that the United States government must proceed to achieve its greatest goal of societal welfare by exercising the security of our nation. Now on to the core of the affirmative case: My first contention in this debate is that sanctions aim to modify behavior, not punish.
5. Plumer, Brad . "Europe’s cap-and-trade program is in trouble. Can it be fixed?." The Washington Post. N.p., 20 Apr. 2013. Web. 11 Mar. 2014. .
Panel on Research on Deterrent and Incapacitate Effects (1978), Deterrence and Incapacitation: Estimating the Effects of Criminal Sanctions on Crime Rates National Academy of Science, Washington DC
New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Shiraev, Eric B., and Vladislav M. Zubok. International Relations. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. Silver, Larry.
...first through a war on drugs, and then a tacit protection of oil interests during Gulf War 1 and veiled protection of US petroleum interests in Gulf War 2. Implicit in public support for both of these wars was the desire to secure continued economic power to protect American interests of an inexpensive (at least monetarily) and high quality of living through control of oil reserves and the acknowledgment that the fates of multinational corporations are directly tied to capitalist American hegemony. The enduring global free trade and protection of American global market security enforcement is a result of efforts by multinational corporations to meet the demands of Americans for cheep products, the needs of industry for cheep supplies. These efforts have lead to free trade conditions that maximize outcomes for industry leaders while satiating the American public.
Tarzi, Shah M., The threat of the use of force in American post-cold war policy in the Third World. Journal of Third World Studies v. 18, no1, (2001): p. 39-64
...eview the EU arms embargo on China: the clash between value and rationale in the European security strategy”, Perspectives. Review of International Affairs (2004) 22 pp. 43-58
Following the Great Recession, the world has been facing complex global transformations. Dani Rodrik’s “The Globalization Paradox: Democracy and the Future of the World Economy” portrays the challenges of the implications that our current model of globalization relies upon. Rodrik’s work reveals both the implications and connections of the relationships between markets, the states, and globalization in the currently changing world. Throughout the book, Rodrik argues the validity of five key points: markets require regulatory institutions, such institutions take on a variety of forms, societies should orient their market-supporting institutions to their own unique needs, markets that are responsive to democracy can avoid institutional convergence, and a world that is responsive to democracy will not reach full globalization. This book has made me question the long term sustainability of the already evolving economic globalization process. Rodrik explains that the process of globalization must be managed so that the entire world can benefit.
Mingst, K. (2011). Essentials of international relations. (5th ed., p. 70-1). New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company
I would recommend this book to my dad. It leaves the reader thinking, and imparts several worthwhile lessons about how humans shape the environment, politics, and the economy. Economics and politics are extremely intertwined. If one wishes to be an informed, politically active citizen, an understanding of economics is key. On the flip side, economists need to have a knowledge of politics to understand trade regulations, foreign actions, and international business. Just as America uses economic access as rewards to her allies, revoking economic access can be used as a ‘punishment.’ For example, in the recent months Russia annexed Crimea, and has threatened Ukraine. United Nations members, including America, have placed sanctions against Russia, to show that they do not condone Putin’s actions. The goal with these sanctions is not to damage the economy, but rather put pressure on Russia, in hopes to influence Putin’s next action. Sanctions, boycotts and blockades have had a long history throughout the world as protest strategies and political statements, just as economics and politics have been intertwined since the beginning of modern
Strange, S. (1994), ‘Wake up Krasner! The world has changed’, Review of International Political Economy, Summer 1994, 1 (2), pp. 209-20, Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
With so much focus on the positive elements of free trade, the negative aspects of an open system are often overlooked. However, they do exist, and protectionism is needed. Consequently, safeguards are built into the system. States look out for their own good, whether that is through the use of escape clauses or the choice of the optimal forum for dispute settlement based on the precedent they do or do not want set. This paper argues that protectionism is valuable and inherent in the current system; however, not enough. Powerful states exploit weaker states, and “free trade” exacerbates the problem. I will first discuss why free trade does not work. Then, I will explain how the current system enables the inherent protectionist attitude of states. Finally, I will analyze the fairness of the system.
...y supply and this causes the collapse in the U.S. and elsewhere (Pinnell, Lecture notes, 3/23). Consequently, countries become very protectionist to protect firms at home and international trade collapses (Pinnell, Lecture notes, 3/23). Therefore, states must make decisions with reciprocity and consequences in mind (Pinnell, Lecture notes, 3/23).