Abstract

This analysis highlights the significant role that domestic actors play in determining the outcomes of economic sanctions. It models the behavior of the main opposition party during an economic sanction episode, and introduces two commonly used variables when considering the effectiveness of economic sanctions—regime type and issue type—from a different perspective. Using Bayesian probabilities and a two-stage game-theoretic approach, the analysis finds that states are more likely to impose economic sanctions related to security issues rather than to nonsecurity issues. The tendency to impose sanctions to coerce action on security-related issues is higher when opposition parties in the sanctioning state object to the sanctions. The findings demonstrate that sanctions are more effective when they are supported by the opposition in sender states, as well as target states. Consistent with the literature, this analysis finds that sanctions are more effective when they are targeted against democracies. The game results indicate that sanctions are more successful when they relate to security issues. This paper supplies policymakers with a simple criterion for economic sanctions successs comprised of the support of the opposition within the sender state, that the issue should be of high stakes, and there is support for the economic sanctions from a viable opposition within the target state.

Highlights

  • Economic sanctions cost the United States (US) between $15 and $19 billion in potential exports annually, leading to a potential loss of 200,000 export jobs (Hufbauer et al 1990)

  • The Threat and Imposition of Economic Sanctions (TIES) dataset indicated that of 348 cases, where threatened sanctions were related to security issues, 185 cases escalated to the imposition stage

  • 722 cases were sanctions related to nonsecurity issues, with 333 cases escalating to the imposition stage

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Economic sanctions cost the United States (US) between $15 and $19 billion in potential exports annually, leading to a potential loss of 200,000 export jobs (Hufbauer et al 1990). The United States accounts for approximately 48% of sanctioning episodes, and continues to rely heavily on the foreign policy tool under the current Trump administration. This provides merit to the investigation of economic effectiveness, given their colossal economic, social and cultural repercussions (Morgan et al 2014). Regime type determines the set of preferences, options and utilities that the ruler and his/her support circles pose during an economic sanctions episode. For the purpose of this analysis, regime type concerns the question of whether a state is democratic or authoritarian. The assumption is that the behavior of elites within an authoritarian regime will follow from motivations that are markedly different from the motivations that drive behavior within democratic states (de Mesquita et al 2005). Dictators with hybrid electoral regimes and liberal/semi-liberal economies will utilize different tactics to rally support than those used within personalist regimes

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call