This reminds me of an old adage about government. It goes something like this.
“Oh my god that thing that’s happening is terrible. We should do something!! Well, this is something, so let’s do this!” Without putting in much more thought than that.
As a means to change regimes, sanctions don't work on their own, much as air power cannot win wars all by itself. But that is not what's happening here. Wartime economic sanctions are VERY different from peacetime sanctions. None of your examples are the one I would use.
I would look instead at Germany 1914-1918, which is the *original* economic sanction program. It took four years to work -- in fact, it took until 1916 for the British Foreign Office to even make the blockade effective -- but it did work as intended. Germany eventually ran out of ammo.
Although there were people who sold it as a way to make Germans overthrow their own leaders, that is not what the blockade was designed to do. Putin, like Kaiser Wilhelm II, now has a limited window to invade his neighbors with modern weapons. No such limits will apply to Ukraine. THAT is what sanctions are supposed to accomplish.
Russia depends on the outside world for most manufactured goods more complicated than a blender. The oligarchs run the oil companies and don't really care if they country doesn't make stuff.
The economic blockade was managed inside the Foreign Office because it so rarely involved armaments. Economic warfare methods included blacklisting of companies doing business with the enemy, even in neutral countries. Assets were attacked everywhere and Germany had far fewer overseas assets because they were a much younger empire. Agents purchased key goods for the sole purpose of keeping them out of German hands. One notable example of the latter is anthracite coal. Without it, German battleships were slower and needed more maintenance time. After 1916, only low quality coal was available to heat boilers, so the economic war had direct impact on German conduct in the war at sea without firing a shot.
A blockade is an act of war. It was even explicitly defined as an act of war by the London Naval Accords under which the British prosecuted the war against Germany. This is similar to thinking that the USA can establish a no-fly zone over Ukraine without a war between the USA and Russia.
Whereas a no-fly zone does not exist over Ukraine right now, sanctions against Russia do. If Putin was going to treat them as acts of war he would have done so already.
Yes. I didn't get around to talking about Iran (2,000 words is enough), but I think that's one of a few examples that suggest that sanctions do SOMETHING. It's just that the bar for regime change is very high.
I just worry that the more desperate Putin and his regime become, the more likely it is that we will see the use of chemical/biological weapons and/or nuclear weapons.
If you a want a precedent for what needs to happen to Putin, look at South Korea in 1979. The South Korean dictator Park Chung Hee thought he was just having dinner w/ the head of the South Korean CIA and some geisha-type girls, but the CIA director shot him dead for reasons that are still unclear to this day-the Korean gov’t didn’t have democratic elections until 1987 or 88’, and the director of the KCIA was quickly arrested and executed. The point is that Putin’s elite will need to take him out, not a mass popular uprising/protest movement.
I can't help thinking about the 500,000 children who died needlessly due to the sanctions on Iraq in 1991-98. Different situation, obviously, but certainly a spectacular example of sanctions that did much more harm than good.
This reminds me of an old adage about government. It goes something like this.
“Oh my god that thing that’s happening is terrible. We should do something!! Well, this is something, so let’s do this!” Without putting in much more thought than that.
What you've described is about 95% of all government and corporate policies imposed in reaction to Covid.
or everything honestly. Government hasn't been historically good at thinking in terms of "down the line."
As a means to change regimes, sanctions don't work on their own, much as air power cannot win wars all by itself. But that is not what's happening here. Wartime economic sanctions are VERY different from peacetime sanctions. None of your examples are the one I would use.
I would look instead at Germany 1914-1918, which is the *original* economic sanction program. It took four years to work -- in fact, it took until 1916 for the British Foreign Office to even make the blockade effective -- but it did work as intended. Germany eventually ran out of ammo.
Although there were people who sold it as a way to make Germans overthrow their own leaders, that is not what the blockade was designed to do. Putin, like Kaiser Wilhelm II, now has a limited window to invade his neighbors with modern weapons. No such limits will apply to Ukraine. THAT is what sanctions are supposed to accomplish.
There is a world of difference between economic sanctions and a military blockade.
Russia depends on the outside world for most manufactured goods more complicated than a blender. The oligarchs run the oil companies and don't really care if they country doesn't make stuff.
How will they conquer Ukraine without stuff?
Spears?
The economic blockade was managed inside the Foreign Office because it so rarely involved armaments. Economic warfare methods included blacklisting of companies doing business with the enemy, even in neutral countries. Assets were attacked everywhere and Germany had far fewer overseas assets because they were a much younger empire. Agents purchased key goods for the sole purpose of keeping them out of German hands. One notable example of the latter is anthracite coal. Without it, German battleships were slower and needed more maintenance time. After 1916, only low quality coal was available to heat boilers, so the economic war had direct impact on German conduct in the war at sea without firing a shot.
A blockade is an act of war. It was even explicitly defined as an act of war by the London Naval Accords under which the British prosecuted the war against Germany. This is similar to thinking that the USA can establish a no-fly zone over Ukraine without a war between the USA and Russia.
Whereas a no-fly zone does not exist over Ukraine right now, sanctions against Russia do. If Putin was going to treat them as acts of war he would have done so already.
Again, sanctions and blockades are very different.
Sanctions: The original Cancel Culture.
Do you think the sanctions will impact Russia's ability to continue the war?
Yes. I didn't get around to talking about Iran (2,000 words is enough), but I think that's one of a few examples that suggest that sanctions do SOMETHING. It's just that the bar for regime change is very high.
No-one is ramping up oil production to compensate for the import ban. But more importantly, is France ramping up Grey Goose distillation?
I just worry that the more desperate Putin and his regime become, the more likely it is that we will see the use of chemical/biological weapons and/or nuclear weapons.
Welp, sounds like you called it?
https://faridaily.substack.com/p/now-were-going-to-fck-them-all-whats
Nice bit of writing here, Exhibit A: "kleptocrats knifing the guy they decided was doing kleptocracy wrong."
If you a want a precedent for what needs to happen to Putin, look at South Korea in 1979. The South Korean dictator Park Chung Hee thought he was just having dinner w/ the head of the South Korean CIA and some geisha-type girls, but the CIA director shot him dead for reasons that are still unclear to this day-the Korean gov’t didn’t have democratic elections until 1987 or 88’, and the director of the KCIA was quickly arrested and executed. The point is that Putin’s elite will need to take him out, not a mass popular uprising/protest movement.
Born to Run is overdone and self important, Nebraska is Springsteen’s crown jewel.
I know aa few Russian citizens who've fled the country and having their Spotify accounts shut down just seems more like a "fuck you" from the West.
We should be trying to get these people on our side instead of telling them they suck.
I can't help thinking about the 500,000 children who died needlessly due to the sanctions on Iraq in 1991-98. Different situation, obviously, but certainly a spectacular example of sanctions that did much more harm than good.
https://www.gicj.org/positions-opinons/gicj-positions-and-opinions/1188-razing-the-truth-about-sanctions-against-iraq
Great article, Jeff. I fear many Americans are relying too heavily on sanctions scaring Putin into “doing the right thing.”