Abstract
Amsterdam Law Forum (ALF) is the student-run 'International Law Journal' of VU University. Every year ALF publishes a winter, spring, and summer issue. The journal consists of three sections; scientific articles, opinion articles, and commentaries. As of this year, ALF also creates a section for inaugural speeches. In addition, ALF hosts a conference in spring with a relevant legal theme, where renowned speakers are invited to share their perspectives. Overall, ALF is a topical journal that provides a platform for established scholars and young academics to share knowledge, opinions and experiences and to make contributions to the international law discourse. Staff, PhD students and master students who have written a very good thesis are invited to submit an article to ALF. What is learned in the cradle is carried to the tomb: we are looking forward to sharing your articles on our website!
Highlights
Sanctions come in many shades and hues, and in different sizes and with different risks
This article identifies untapped potential for creative combinations within the sanctions arsenal, and substantial long-term risks threatening to undermine the very global financial and trading infrastructure that renders Western sanctioning power effective in the first place. It introduces multi-party sanctions against Russia and the Russian response thereto, analysing how sanctions were aided by three unusual prongs: the damage potential of a SWIFT blockade, the devastating effect of the post-2014 oil price drop, and the consideration of using debt sanctions. It examines defensive measures taken by Russia and others that aim at undermining the effectiveness of future Western sanctions
In many cases, including the measures taken against Iran and Russia and in instances related to African states, sanctions encounter far too little public and legal scrutiny[3] despite the fact that these measures, aggressively and over substantial periods of time, leverage private property and transactions for public purposes,[4] almost in every case without ‘prompt, adequate and effective compensation’
Summary
Sanctions come in many shades and hues, and in different sizes and with different risks. Since 1987, the US sanctioned 60 states with UN Security Council approval and 44 unilaterally, while the EU sanctioned 32 states with UN Security Council resolutions and 23 states without.[2] In many cases, including the measures taken against Iran and Russia and in instances related to African states, sanctions encounter far too little public and legal scrutiny[3] despite the fact that these measures, aggressively and over substantial periods of time, leverage private property and transactions for public purposes,[4] almost in every case without ‘prompt, adequate and effective compensation’.5 They do not always result in the discharge of disrupted contractual obligations under force majeure or similar concepts.[6]. The paper concludes that while the sanctions regime against Iran largely achieved what could reasonably be expected (and may have served as an effective deterrent to Russia), sanctions against Russia in the wake of the Ukraine crisis are still unconvincing as to their efficacy
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
