The use of sanctions to deal with and bring enemies to their knees is a practice that has been prevalent since ancient times. Perhaps one of the most famous examples of sanctions in ancient Greece is the Pericles Decree in 432 BC. This decree prohibited the entry of products from “Megara” (a city in present-day Attica, Greece) into the Greek market due to the city-state’s territorial violations and dishonoring of three Athenian women. (1) With the establishment of the new international community, this method was also considered as one of the ways to deal with enemies. A method that, in the words of Woodrow Wilson, the President of the United States in 1919, is a peaceful, calm, and deadly solution. (1) Of course, Wilson made these remarks about economic sanctions. But it seems that this issue is also ongoing in relation to other goals.

Nowadays, various types of sanctions are imposed on individuals, groups, companies, or governments and are enforced through different methods. One type of these sanctions is targeted sanctions. These targeted sanctions (many of which are human rights-related) are tools used by governments to freeze assets and deny visas to individuals who are involved in human rights violations. These sanctions, also known as smart sanctions, can be imposed by a country or a multilateral organization such as the United Nations on individuals or entities directly or indirectly involved in human rights violations. The term “targeted” or “smart” refers to the fact that they do not target the entire economy of a country and are not a comprehensive economic blockade. Instead, they target specific individuals, transactions, economic sectors, or institutions, with the aim of putting pressure on key individuals and officials in the targeted country to change their policies, or to weaken specific sectors of the economy and thus put significant pressure on the country and its sensitive programs. In this way, without

These sanctions can have immediate and short-term effects such as financial and immigration restrictions for the sanctioned individual or entity. In the first step, the assets of the sanctioned individual or entity are frozen, depending on their accessibility worldwide and the ability of the sanctioning entity or government to enforce its sanctions. This prevents the sanctioned individual from accessing their assets. In addition to financial sanctions and the inability to access economic resources, in the legal sphere of the sanctioning entity or country, the sanctioned individual or entity is unable to engage in trade or economic relations, and cannot conduct any economic or financial transactions. For example, individuals or entities sanctioned by the United States cannot conduct any transactions using the US dollar. We know that due to the widespread use of the US dollar, many countries and companies use it as an intermediary for their currency exchanges. For example, in a financial exchange between an Iranian company and a British company, the Iranian rial may first be converted to US dollars and then to British pounds in order to

The issue of immigration sanctions is also completely clear and obvious. The sanctioned individual will not be able to travel or obtain a visa for the jurisdiction or country imposing the sanctions. Additionally, if present in that jurisdiction in any way (except for cases that involve diplomatic immunity), that jurisdiction will take action against the individual based on the charges brought against them (usually human rights violations).

Targeted sanctions also have more appeal for sanctioning countries, as their implementation can occur repeatedly and frequently, unlike comprehensive sanctions that can only be applied once. Targeted sanctions can be gradually and incrementally implemented, with their scope being reduced or expanded. In this way, with each reduction or addition to the sanctions, a message can be conveyed to the target country and its policymakers. Comprehensive sanctions do not have this capability. (4)

Sometimes, regarding sanctions, their scope is not clear for individuals, institutions, or targeted countries who are the enforcers, as well as for individuals and institutions who are supposed to implement them. In this situation, due to the high risk and cost of not enforcing the sanctions and their accompanying penalties, these individuals, institutions, or countries generally cut off their relationship with the sanctioned country and its related and affiliated individuals and institutions. In other words, by taking preventive measures and cutting off all communication, they reduce the risk of being penalized for violating the sanctions to zero. This situation is commonly referred to as excessive compliance. It is a situation that is a natural result of the lack of certainty about the scope of the sanctions and how they are enforced by supervisory and judicial authorities.

Sanctions are not always clear and transparent. This can make their implementation, especially in the economic sector, difficult. Those who are sanctioned can bypass the sanctions by using third countries. They can also deceive and mislead institutions that are responsible for identifying and enforcing sanctions by hiding behind multi-layered companies. These sanctions will certainly make things harder for the sanctioned individuals or entities. However, it will not be impossible for them to evade the sanctions. In addition, there have been criticisms of the principle of sanctions by experts. It has been argued that in some cases, managing sanctions by the sanctioned regimes can have the opposite effect and even strengthen them.

Karl Philipp Gottlieb Clausewitz (1780-1831), in the first chapter, second section of his famous unfinished work “On War,” has a sentence. He says, “War is a violent action to force the opponent to do our will.” However, he apparently forgets to continue: Sanctions are also a continuation of the policy of war with another tool. (6) Today, countries use sanctions more than war for various reasons in their confrontation with each other. This tool is also a very good method for international institutions and countries that take human rights seriously to put maximum pressure on human rights violators at the lowest cost. Whether these pressures will be answered in the short or long term will be determined by time, but there have been many cases throughout the twentieth century where authoritarian governments have been forced to bow to targeted sanctions and have realized that the global community will not tolerate their human rights violations. In a world where human rights violators resort to any means to violate

Notes:

1- Qasemi, Naser, and Salam Moayed, Ahmad Ali, Legal Analysis of Targeted Financial Sanctions against Individuals and Terrorist Groups, University of Judicial Sciences and Administrative Services, Journal of Legal Perspectives, Volume 26, Issue 94, September 2021, pp. 251-273.

2- What is Chemiotec, Solest, and Novo, Lisandra’s “Targeted Human Rights Sanctions” and why is it being used for Iran?, Atlantic Council, August 18, 2023.

3- What is the meaning and significance of the sanctions imposed by America on Khamenei?, Deutsche Welle Persian, 4 Tir 1398.

4- Ganbari, Hamid, Sanctions and the Issue of Over Compliance, Eco Iran, 28 Shahrivar 1402.

5- Google, Julia, and Von Sust, Kristen, legitimate claims are important: why sanctions cannot provoke democratization in authoritarian regimes, Institute for Global and Regional Studies, Germany, October 2013.

6- Barati, Mehran, A Brief History of War and Sanctions; Running on the Path of Hardships, BBC Persian, 31 Khordad 1400.