To whomever it may concern, I hereby invite you to try to persuade
me that economic sanctions are an effective method for dealing with
problematic countries as a way to urge them to comply with international
law. As many of you are aware at the beginning of last year (2022)
Russia was hit with a barrage of sanctions emanating from a myriad of
nations across the globe as a consequence of their barbaric invasion of
Ukraine. The countries involved in this reprisal against Russia are the
UK, US, EU, Switzerland, Canada, Japan, and Taiwan, amongst many others.
The sanctions include but are not limited to asset freezes, travel
bans, de-registering or controlling the movement of aircraft and ships,
cutting off all diplomatic ties, preventing participation in
international sporting events, arms embargoes, and other trade restrictions.
Regarding
the ongoing situation between Russia and Ukraine, I have recently
pondered the effectiveness of the current sanctions against Russia and
any nation in general. Based on my current research thus far I have read
some great arguments from both parties regarding this debate topic.
However, so far it seems that those against appear to hold more weight
from my own perspective. As for Russia, the sanctions against them are
far from normal and this situation would be better described as a global
economic war some have argued and I currently cannot say that I am in
disagreement with them. Thus in the case of any war, innocent people get
hurt regardless of whether it is economic or where military
intervention is involved, and this a factor that also needs
consideration. I suppose people tend to be more blasé with an economic
war compared with military intercession.
As it stands I am not convinced that economic sanctions are proving to be or have ever proved very effective in terms of:
- Hitting the right spot where intended.
- Being
void of any ethical implications whereby the lives of innocent
civilians not only of the target nation but also the offending one as
well as the wider social structure were spared from needless suffering
or death and this includes children.
- The corrupt and powerful within the
targeted countries actually feel the impact of these sanctions
significantly, especially with reference to powerful countries such as
Russia.
- Void of any backfire effect through which the sanctions from one nation imposed on another are actually self-defeating.
- Devoid any retaliatory sanctions that have a major impact on the offending nation or nations.
- Being implemented in a timely manner.
- Avoiding any possibility of any disciplinary actions spiraling into an all-out economic war.
- Preventing
giving more ammunition to the leaders of those nations to instill more
distrust in their citizens of other nations. For example, the prospect
of Vladimir Putin using the sanctions to his advantage by further
brainwashing the civilians of his country that the West is a bad group
of people that hate Russia.
If someone can
provide an argument that satisfies all these conditions as well as gives
an example of this being the case at any point in history then the odds
of me being persuaded are fairly high. For those of you that are on the
side against and think I have missed anything please let me know and I
will update that in an edit.
Debra AI Prediction
Post Argument Now Debate Details +
Arguments
I nowadays think that the way towards improving lives of citizens of authoritarian states is not through making their lives hard, but through interacting with them. It is not like by talking and shaking hands with someone you somehow endorse all of their actions. It certainly seems more helpful to me than pointing guns at each other.
Of course, when we are talking about something burning, this argument might not be applicable. When in Rwanda tens of thousands of civilians were being slaughtered every single day, it was not a proper time to "just talk": in such cases it is time to take the knives out. One could argue that the Russian-Ukrainian war is such a case, and I do not necessarily disagree with that. Still, while defending Ukraine from Russia in some manner appears prudent, I do not see the point of just breaking all communication and erecting walls between the countries. It is not like Putin and all the military generals are the ones who are going to suffer from the sanctions the most: they are doing fine, they have some safety net available. But a grandma in Chelyabinsk who is struggling with feeding her two grandchildren whose parents were drunkards and now enjoy their afterlife in a local cemetery? She will feel the sanctions alright.
Look at North Korea, the most heavily sanctioned country in the world. This is how its leader spends his days:
And these are some of his... citizens:
The regime is over 70 years old and still kicking. It does not appear that the sanctions are improving the lives of these poor folks.
  Considerate: 96%  
  Substantial: 96%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.24  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 94%  
  Learn More About Debra
If we were really serious about ending Russias invasion of Ukraine it would have been nipped in the bud straight away.
Incidentally on the side issue of Ukraine I dislike Putin intensely but nor have I much time for Zelensky who can say as he wishes and recieve thunderous applause from the adoring media ; the guy is just as corrupt as the people he accuses of corruption and Ukraine is one of the most corrupt countries on earth with 38 politicians named (more than any other country) in the Pandora papers and the Hilarious thing is Zelensky ran on an anti corruption ticket
When it's all over no doubt Zelensky will receive the Nobel peace prize and spend the rest of his life on chat shows and book tours and be given every honour every country has to offer
The only way to my mind of solving such issues is not sanctions but dialogue unfortunately very few are qualified to communicate effectively as that's the human condition as we rarely settle such differences with dialogue.
A parent in my time growing up would smack a child which tells you all you need to know as violence was and to a large extent still is the default mode it seems of most humans proving how ineffective they are at communicating even to children
A favourite assesment of human nature I totally agree with is that of Thomas Hobbes in The Leviathan as he said human nature is "red in tooth and claw" I totally agree.
  Considerate: 77%  
  Substantial: 91%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 13.18  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 63%  
  Learn More About Debra
@Dee @ZeusAres42
South Africa: Economic sanctions imposed on South Africa by many countries in the 1980s played a role in ending the country's system of racial segregation known as apartheid.
Libya: Economic sanctions imposed on Libya in the 1990s were successful in bringing about the release of two Libyan intelligence officials who were charged in connection with the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103.
Serbia: Economic sanctions imposed on Serbia by the European Union and the United States in the 1990s played a role in ending the Bosnian War and bringing about the Dayton Agreement.
Myanmar: Economic sanctions imposed on Myanmar by the United States, Canada, and the European Union in the 1990s and 2000s were successful in bringing about political change in the country and the release of political prisoners.
Iraq: Economic sanctions imposed on Iraq by the United Nations after the Gulf War in the 1990s were successful in forcing Iraq to comply with UN weapons inspections and disarmament.
Zimbabwe: Economic sanctions imposed by the European Union and the United States on Zimbabwe in the 2000s were successful in bringing about political change in the country and the formation of a unity government.
Venezuela: Economic sanctions imposed on Venezuela by the United States and other countries in response to the country's political and economic crisis have been successful in putting pressure on the government to restore democracy and respect human rights.
  Considerate: 94%  
  Substantial: 87%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 13.4  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 93%  
  Learn More About Debra
The US have applied sanctions on Venezuela for seventeen years, is this what you term 'effective'?
  Considerate: 98%  
  Substantial: 73%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 13.4  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 75%  
  Learn More About Debra
@Dee said: I just picked one example from your list
What other examples do you reject? South Africa? I listed 7...
  Considerate: 90%  
  Substantial: 42%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.36  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 88%  
  Learn More About Debra
Ahh I see that's the game , the one I picked demonstrating clearly how ineffective sanctions are you dismiss why?
  Considerate: 75%  
  Substantial: 62%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 92%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.44  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra
@Dee
I'll rephrase...I said some economic sanctions worked. In my world "some" is an unspecified number. Unless you reject all 7, my assertion is correct.
Are you going to explain why you reject all 7?
  Considerate: 95%  
  Substantial: 73%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.62  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
lets take Myanmar 20 years of ineffective sanctions , which one do you want next?
Imposing sanctions is not new to Myanmar and its economy and people. Since independence, the country has been under the impact of ethnic conflicts and a continuous fight for civilian versus the military rule. It took its worst shape in 1988, and since then many countries had imposed sanctions against Myanmar. However, despite being under two decades of sanctions, the Myanmar military had found ways to overcome the impact of sanctions.
With the transition towards democratic values, such as conducting general elections, the sanctions were gradually removed. However, the western countries grew critical of the civilian government Aung San Suu Kyi and the military for the atrocities inflicted on the Rohingya in 2017. Sanctions were again im-posed, but these were tailored; these sanctions did not have the same broad impact on the economy or population as pre-reform sanctions’ regimes. But they were also ineffective in nudging Myanmar’s mili-tary or government to change their policy regarding the Rohingya.
V.I.F.
I thought instead of you rushing to copy and paste a list you would at least do a tiny bit of research into the 'effectiveness' of these sanctions
  Considerate: 90%  
  Substantial: 92%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 95%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.24  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 78%  
  Learn More About Debra
Should I go on with the others? Let's go one more .......another one that's going on over 20 years that's your idea of 'effective' seriously?
The U.S. sanctions against Zimbabwe have been piled on since 2001, following a government decision to repossess land from minority white farmers for redistribution to landless indigenous Zimbabweans.
* The sanction-induced economic mire has inflicted a myriad of real challenges on Zimbabweans, especially amid an unprecedented global pandemic.
* Given the distressing effect of the sanctions on the viability of businesses in Zimbabwe, there have been outcries against the economic punishment in and outside the country.
Global link
  Considerate: 89%  
  Substantial: 83%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 97%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 11.52  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 93%  
  Learn More About Debra
Go on...do all 7!
  Considerate: 98%  
  Substantial: 14%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 0.9  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 98%  
  Learn More About Debra
Go on...do all 7!
Stop being so childish you posted up a copy and pasted piece without researching and you wan me to do it for you , go away
  Considerate: 53%  
  Substantial: 46%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 84%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 5.2  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 92%  
  Learn More About Debra
Ahem. Pardon me for my profound ignorance, but didn't we invade Iraq and kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people precisely because it wasn't complying with UN weapons inspections?
Far from being effective against the actual policy makers, these sanctions were responsible for the deaths of at least half a million children from malnutrition and starvation according to at least one report:-
As many as 576,000 Iraqi children may have died since the end of the Persian Gulf war because of economic sanctions imposed by the Security Council, according to two scientists.
https://www.nytimes.com/1995/12/01/world/iraq-sanctions-kill-children-un-reports.html
In fact, that report is from 1995, only 5 years into the sanctions program.
  Considerate: 77%  
  Substantial: 69%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.46  
  Sources: 2  
  Relevant (Beta): 88%  
  Learn More About Debra
At first sight, it looks like you have a point here. However, there are some things that not have been taken into account here. A whole nation was being punished as a consequence of international disciplinary action as opposed to just the corrupt rulers (somewhat hypocritical of those imposing the sanctions). This does not satisfy the ethical implications aforementioned in the Original Post.
@JulesKorngold
You have given a short list of differing sanctions throughout history with reference to how they were either possibly successful or efficacious with reference to certain aspects. Now, I will get to every one of the points on your list as time permits. However, in the meantime feel free to respond with a rebuttal to the above until I get to the rest of your list. In addition to that, in your next response, if you could also elaborate on exactly how they all satisfy the aforementioned bulleted index in the OP that would be great. Because as it stands that from a glance you appear to have not accounted for a plethora of variables at play. You especially appear to have overlooked the moral and ethical aspects here; for example, your mention of the post gulf war sanctions on Iraq (the toughest sanctions in history) ignore the fact that this resulted in countless child deaths, inability to get clean water, food, medicine, hospitalized children not being able to enjoy simple things such as teddy bears, forced child labor, child education decline, and the fact that none of these sanctions were even enough to unhorse Saddam Hussein!
Anyway, I look forward to your next response.
  Considerate: 77%  
  Substantial: 88%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 99%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.78  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 50%  
  Learn More About Debra
So the question that really being answered here is how do you effectively cause the change you want without causing total war? However much we'd like to directly target the corrupt rulers any direct target on them would almost definitely cause a war as they are calling all the shots. I'm not sure there is a perfect solution. Sanctions most definetly effect the overall population, but I believe the hope is that may cause enough unrest in the civilian population the government has no choice but to stop without civil war.
Let's take Ukraine for example. We only have so many choices. War, Sanctions, Nothing, or diplomatic discussion which no doubt would involve giving up portions of Ukraine.
Which do you prefer?
  Considerate: 81%  
  Substantial: 76%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 10.88  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 91%  
  Learn More About Debra
Or, to put it another way, how can you bully other countries into doing what you want without interfering with their food supply?
  Considerate: 89%  
  Substantial: 83%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.08  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra
Let's take Ukraine for example. We only have so many choices. War, Sanctions, Nothing, or diplomatic discussion which no doubt would involve giving up portions of Ukraine.
Which do you prefer?
Well let's take one option , do nothing. What makes Ukraine so special ? I think we have a fair idea why collectively that we have got involved in Ukraine and how totally ineffective all sanctions have been so far, those in power keep repeating the same tired attempts at solutions that rarely work
I detest Putin he's an egotistical bully but Zelensky is also a slimy little toad ,the media portray Zelensky as a cross between Winston Churchill and mother Teresa; the slime ball attempted to launch world war three by claiming a Ukrainian fired missile that hit Poland was launched by Russia
Putin is no fool the minute the sanctions came he pulled the countries top economist out of retirement and she came up with a remarkable strategy to turn the country around
I have 3 Russian friends over here I display art work with and they are no fans of Putin but they found the idea of economic sanctions against Russia hilarious as it's a total misunderstanding of the Russian pysche , these people know what suffering is they have suffered untold miseries and hardships and yet persist
All Zelensky does is beg for more more and every word he utters receives a deafening standing ovation as he craves the adulation of fawning world leaders and politicians , everywhere he goes he dons the military uniform to demonstrate how ' hands on 'he is at combat
Ukraine was also one (and still is) of the most corrupt in the world. It's also pretty remarkable how many so called 'refugees 'my country and others have taken in at great cost and I say so called 'refugees' because so many are young men of fighting age who left the country at the first shot despite mother Teresa's asking them to stay and fight they chose to flee to a welfare generous country
Diplomatic discussions are preferable the problem is finding people up to the job as effective communication still remains a great problem in all these situations as it looks like outsiders coming in dictating to us type of situation
Do nothing would have been interesting as that's the normal solution to such situations. It's always seems strange to me that international leaders look to some countries and feel the need to be collectively outraged yet when it comes to others little or no reaction , take North Korea the famine there killed between 2:5 and 3:5 million and what did we do?
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 83%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 13.38  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 59%  
  Learn More About Debra
@ZeusAres42 said: You especially appear to have overlooked the moral and ethical aspects
The moral and ethical aspects of imposing economic sanctions include the impact on the civilian population, the effectiveness of the sanctions in achieving their intended goals, and the potential for unintended consequences. On one hand, economic sanctions can be seen as a way to hold a country or regime accountable for human rights abuses or other forms of aggression without resorting to military force. On the other hand, they can also cause significant harm to ordinary people by limiting access to food, medicine, and other basic necessities. Additionally, sanctions can be seen as a violation of the sovereignty of a nation. It's also important to consider the potential unintended consequences, such as sanctions can lead to an increase in corruption and illicit trade, and can also lead to increased poverty and suffering for the population. It's also important to note that economic sanctions can be viewed as a form of collective punishment which is generally considered unethical.
  Considerate: 90%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 13.4  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 97%  
  Learn More About Debra
Sure depending on who you think is doing the bullying?
  Considerate: 89%  
  Substantial: 28%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 100%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 9.24  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
I'm not in full disagreement with your thoughts on Ukraine but we still haven't answered what is an effective way to intervene.
I believe diplomatic discussions are usually preferable but what if the demands being made are insane? Additionally diplomatic resolutions can't always occur otherwise countries looking to gain more territory/power would continue to make small wars/threats knowing they'd get a small favorable outcome everytime they do so.
  Considerate: 90%  
  Substantial: 99%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 13.08  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
but we still haven't answered what is an effective way to intervene.
I believe diplomatic discussions are usually preferable but what if the demands being made are insane? Additionally diplomatic resolutions can't always occur otherwise countries looking to gain more territory/power would continue to make small wars/threats knowing they'd get a small favorable outcome everytime they do so.
I'm with you regards diplomatic solutions being the most favorable option the problem with such is I think very few people are up to the job of communicating effectively , it takes a very special skill set.
If the demands are insane then reasoning is impossible, the question remains then why interfere at all the only reasons we do so is normally there is some advantage large or small to us doing so in the first place
  Considerate: 90%  
  Substantial: 98%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 94%  
  Sentiment: Positive  
  Avg. Grade Level: 13.14  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 92%  
  Learn More About Debra
Well, since Dee brought it up, let's use Ukraine as an example. Ukraine is an ex-Soviet satellite state. When the Cold War ended, the Americans made promises to the Russians that they wouldn't expand NATO any further eastwards. NATO was a Cold War alliance set up as a supposed buffer against Soviet encroachment, so once the Cold War ended it had fulfilled its intended purpose.
Contrary to the promises made by the Americans, NATO began moving steadily eastwards into former Soviet territory and gradually began encircling Russia. There were repeated warnings from the Russian administration that Ukraine was the line in the sand. The previous Ukrainian president was openly pro-Russia, so what the Americans and their allies did was covertly sponsor a coup to have him ousted in 2014. After this happened it led to open civil war in eastern Ukraine.
Finally, with its options limited and having lost a great deal of face internationally, Russia decided its only viable option was to eject the western-backed government installed on its doorstep. The west responded by calling Putin Hitler, villainising him in the media, and inflicting heavy economic sanctions on Russia.
  Considerate: 84%  
  Substantial: 90%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 98%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 12.1  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra