Sanctioning Force
For centuries, when one country has disapproved of another country’s behavior, political leaders have sought ways to communicate their displeasure short of war. That’s the idea behind economic sanctions. Sanctions allow countries to punish another government without resorting to violence. At least, that was the idea. But a recent study by David Lektzian of Texas ...
For centuries, when one country has disapproved of another country's behavior, political leaders have sought ways to communicate their displeasure short of war. That's the idea behind economic sanctions. Sanctions allow countries to punish another government without resorting to violence. At least, that was the idea. But a recent study by David Lektzian of Texas Tech University and Christopher Sprecher of Texas A&M University reveals that sanctions actually make it far more likely that two states will meet on the battlefield.
For centuries, when one country has disapproved of another country’s behavior, political leaders have sought ways to communicate their displeasure short of war. That’s the idea behind economic sanctions. Sanctions allow countries to punish another government without resorting to violence. At least, that was the idea. But a recent study by David Lektzian of Texas Tech University and Christopher Sprecher of Texas A&M University reveals that sanctions actually make it far more likely that two states will meet on the battlefield.
Lektzian and Sprecher examined more than 200 cases of sanctions and found that, when sanctions are added to the mix, military conflict is as much as six times more likely to occur between two countries than if sanctions had not been imposed. Because countries prefer to enact sanctions that aren’t especially costly to themselves, target countries often interpret the action as a lack of resolve. That leads "the country being sanctioned… [to] become almost provocative in its actions," explains Sprecher. "If you try to get away with foreign policy on the cheap, then you’re likely to end up getting into wars that you never really wanted because of miscommunication," adds Lektzian.
So, what is to be made of the existing sanctions on North Korea and Iran? Both Sprecher and Lektzian view the sanctions on North Korea as weak, suggesting that the world may be on a perilous — and unintended — path toward military confrontation in East Asia. And though they agree that the sanctions on Iran have been more costly to the international community, thus conveying greater resolve, they are still not the most effective tool. "I think that there’s a greater likelihood of conflict with Iran now… because of the sanctions," says Sprecher. The Iranians are "sticking out their tongue, saying [to the United States], ‘You’re not going to do anything.’" If the sanctions make the Iranians even more provocative, the United States may feel the need to prove them wrong.
More from Foreign Policy
Saudi-Iranian Détente Is a Wake-Up Call for America
The peace plan is a big deal—and it’s no accident that China brokered it.
The U.S.-Israel Relationship No Longer Makes Sense
If Israel and its supporters want the country to continue receiving U.S. largesse, they will need to come up with a new narrative.
Putin Is Trapped in the Sunk-Cost Fallacy of War
Moscow is grasping for meaning in a meaningless invasion.
How China’s Saudi-Iran Deal Can Serve U.S. Interests
And why there’s less to Beijing’s diplomatic breakthrough than meets the eye.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
