Economic Sanctions Examples

Why This Matters

Economic sanctions sit at the intersection of international law, state power, and economic coercion—making them one of the most frequently tested topics in political economy of international relations. You're being tested on your ability to analyze why states choose sanctions over military force, how different sanction designs produce different outcomes, and what factors determine whether sanctions succeed or fail. Understanding these cases means grasping broader concepts like collective action problems, the security-economy nexus, and the humanitarian consequences of economic statecraft.

Don't just memorize which country sanctioned whom. Instead, focus on what each case reveals about sender credibility, target vulnerability, multilateral coordination, and unintended consequences. When you see a sanctions question on an exam, you should immediately think: Who imposed them? What was the mechanism of pressure? Did they work, and why or why not? These cases are your toolkit for answering those questions with precision.

---

Nonproliferation and Security-Driven Sanctions

These sanctions target states pursuing nuclear weapons or other WMD programs. The underlying logic is denial of resources and technology combined with economic pain to shift cost-benefit calculations for regime leaders.

U.S. Sanctions Against Iran

• Targeted Iran's oil exports and banking sector—designed to cut off the regime's primary revenue source and isolate it from global financial systems
• JCPOA (2015) represented a sanctions relief-for-compliance bargain, demonstrating how sanctions can create negotiating leverage when credibly linked to policy change
• U.S. withdrawal in 2018 illustrates the problem of sender credibility and how unilateral action can undermine multilateral frameworks

International Sanctions Against North Korea

• Multilateral U.N. sanctions combined with unilateral U.S. and South Korean measures create layered pressure on the regime's access to hard currency
• Targeted commodities include coal, textiles, and oil—sectors chosen because they generate regime revenue while theoretically minimizing civilian harm
• Limited success despite decades of pressure highlights how regime type (authoritarian, isolated) affects sanction effectiveness

U.N. Sanctions Against Libya (1992–2003)

• Imposed after the Lockerbie bombing—a clear case of sanctions as punishment and deterrence for state-sponsored terrorism
• Included arms embargoes, trade restrictions, and financial sanctions targeting the Qaddafi regime's ability to project power
• Lifted after Libya compensated victims and abandoned WMD programs—often cited as a sanctions success story demonstrating that clear conditions for removal improve effectiveness

---

Territorial Aggression and Sovereignty Violations

When states violate international norms against territorial conquest, sanctions serve as a collective punishment mechanism meant to signal that aggression carries economic costs.

U.N. Sanctions Against Iraq (1990–2003)

• Comprehensive trade embargo imposed after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait—one of the most extensive sanctions regimes in history
• Humanitarian catastrophe resulted, with estimates of hundreds of thousands of excess deaths, sparking debates about sanctions ethics and proportionality
• Oil-for-Food Programme attempted to address humanitarian concerns but became mired in corruption, illustrating the implementation challenges of comprehensive sanctions

U.S. and EU Sanctions Against Russia Over Ukraine

• Imposed after Crimea annexation (2014) and escalated dramatically after the 2022 full-scale invasion—targeting finance, energy, and defense sectors
• Sectoral sanctions represent a middle ground between comprehensive embargoes and targeted measures, attempting to hurt elites while limiting civilian impact
• SWIFT exclusions and asset freezes demonstrate how financial interdependence can be weaponized, though Russia's countermeasures show targets can adapt

U.N. Sanctions Against Yugoslavia (1990s)

• Arms embargoes and trade sanctions aimed at halting ethnic cleansing during the Balkan Wars
• Targeted Serbia and Montenegro specifically, illustrating how sanctions can be directed at particular actors within a conflict
• Mixed results—contributed to eventual diplomatic resolution but did not prevent atrocities, raising questions about sanctions timing and complementary tools

---

Regime Change and Human Rights Pressure

These sanctions aim to alter domestic political behavior—ending repression, restoring democracy, or dismantling discriminatory systems. The mechanism relies on internal political pressure generated by economic pain.

U.S. Embargo Against Cuba

• Longest-running sanctions regime in modern history—initiated in 1960s after the Cuban Revolution and Soviet alignment
• Comprehensive restrictions on trade, travel, and finance have devastated Cuba's economy but failed to achieve regime change
• Demonstrates the limits of unilateral sanctions—without multilateral support, Cuba maintained economic lifelines through Soviet/Russian and later Venezuelan ties

Sanctions Against South Africa During Apartheid

• Divestment campaigns, trade restrictions, and cultural boycotts implemented by states, corporations, and civil society in the 1980s
• Raised international awareness and imposed reputational costs on the apartheid regime, contributing to internal reform pressure
• Often cited as a sanctions success, though scholars debate whether sanctions or internal resistance played the larger role—illustrates the attribution problem in assessing effectiveness

U.S. Sanctions Against Venezuela

• Targeted the oil sector—Venezuela's primary revenue source—along with individual officials for human rights abuses and corruption
• Aimed to pressure Maduro regime toward democratic restoration, but has contributed to humanitarian crisis and mass migration
• Illustrates the tension between coercive goals and humanitarian consequences, especially when authoritarian regimes shift costs onto populations

---

Civil War and Atrocity Prevention

Sanctions in active conflict zones attempt to constrain regime capacity for violence and create incentives for negotiation. These cases reveal the challenges of using economic tools during ongoing warfare.

U.S. and EU Sanctions Against Syria

• Targeted Assad regime officials, military, and oil sector in response to violent crackdown on protests and civil war atrocities
• Aimed to degrade regime capacity and pressure engagement in peace negotiations, but regime survival remained primary goal for Damascus
• Limited effectiveness given Russian and Iranian support—demonstrates how third-party spoilers can undermine sanctions by providing alternative resources

---

Quick Reference Table

---

Self-Check Questions

1. Compare and contrast the sanctions against Iran and North Korea. Why has Iran shown more willingness to negotiate despite both regimes facing nonproliferation pressure?

2. Which two cases best illustrate the humanitarian costs of comprehensive sanctions, and what reforms emerged from these experiences?

3. If an FRQ asks you to evaluate whether sanctions are an effective foreign policy tool, which success case and which failure case would you pair, and what variables explain the difference?

4. How do the sanctions against Russia (2014–present) reflect lessons learned from the Iraq sanctions regime regarding targeting and civilian impact?

5. The Cuba and South Africa cases both involved sanctions aimed at domestic political change. What factors explain why sanctions contributed to apartheid's end but failed to produce regime change in Cuba?