This Chapter outlines the national legal frameworks for applying security measures by the US, the EU, and BRICS in order to understand the level of securitization of their policy objectives. It focuses on the measures that are or can be applied by the US, the EU, and BRICS in pursuit of their national (regional) security interests and, thus, potentially subjected to security exceptions under international law. Specifically, this Chapter discusses the practice of application of economic sanctions and investment screening mechanisms in those jurisdictions.

In this chapter we discuss the case of the Russian unicorn Yandex, also known as the ‘Russian Google’. The company has become one of the largest information technology (IT) champions in Russia over the years and seemed to be unaffected by government, political interests and geopolitical tensions. In 2022, after the military conflict with Ukraine triggered severe economic sanctions on Russia, the company experienced political pressures both from the sanctioning countries and its home country government. We analyse the journey of Yandex, which started as a national IT unicorn, and shed light on its transformation into a state-affiliated enterprise in a dynamic situation of geopolitical reshuffling.

In the last century, economic sanctions have been used with increasing frequency as a tool of global governance, as well as in foreign policy. At the same time, they have long been criticized for their lack of success in achieving the stated goals of the sanctioners. However, what has received far less attention is the question of whether, and when, it is legitimate to impose sanctions. It has become increasingly clear that the humanitarian impact of sanctions may be devastating, affecting healthcare and food security, as well as harming vulnerable populations such as migrants. Sanctions may interfere with the work of humanitarian aid organizations, create diplomatic problems, and undermine the autonomy of sovereign states. Further, there can be significant legal questions regarding the use of sanctions, whether they are imposed by states or by institutions of global governance.

This chapter examines the devastating impact of the Gulf War and subsequent economic sanctions of the 1990s on Iraq’s healthcare system, arguing that the sanctions imposed can be understood as a form of silent warfare, causing long-term suffering and systemic collapse. The sanctions, aimed at compelling Iraq’s compliance with international demands, disrupted the country’s vital infrastructure, leading to widespread shortages of medical supplies, a mass exodus of healthcare professionals, and deteriorating public health. As hospitals faced chronic shortages, doctors were forced to adopt unorthodox medical practices, which, though necessary at the time, contributed to the rise of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and the entrenchment of chronic health issues. The chapter underscores the ecological consequences of sanctions, with a focus on how this induced an ongoing public health crisis, not only within Iraq but across the broader region. It further explores the long-lasting effects of these adaptations on medical practices, such as improvisation in wound care and antibiotic use, which fostered conditions for the spread of resistant infections. By tracing the enduring repercussions of the sanctions, the chapter advocates for a rethinking of sanctions as a form of warfare that has far-reaching, long- lasting consequences for healthcare systems, particularly in conflict zones.

This chapter reviews recent advances in addressing the identification of the effects of sanctions on cross-country and country-level studies. It argues that, given the difficulties in assessing causal relationships in cross-national data, country-level case studies can serve as a useful and informative complement to cross-national regression studies. However, case studies pose a set of additional potential empirical pitfalls that can also obfuscate rather than clarify the identification of causal mechanisms at work, so they should be treated as a complement rather than a substitute to cross-national research. As an example, the chapter discusses the impact of sanctions on Venezuela and shows how they contributed to the country’s economic collapse through their impact on oil production, public sector revenues, and imports of essential goods. These findings are consistent with those of the broader cross-national literature, which identifies constraints on an economy’s trade and financial links as a key channel for the impact of sanctions.

Japan’s participation in World War II was a consequence of self-reinforcing cycles of Japan’s aggressions in East Asia and the economic sanctions imposed on Japan by the Western countries. During the war, the United States blocked transportation of natural resources to Japan from the Great East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere using its naval power, particularly submarine attacks on Japanese ships. Japan managed to adapt to this blockade strategy of the United States by adopting various measures, including accelerating merchant shipbuilding to maintain the marine shipping capacity and substituting domestic resources for imported raw materials. Although limits were ultimately reached, these measures for adaptation enabled Japan to continue the war for more than three and a half years.

The questions of accountability, legality, and legitimacy in regard to economic sanctions are remarkably convoluted. While they are distinct concepts, in the context of economic sanctions they are closely intertwined. Accountability can be found in many forms, including judicial venues, institutional oversight, political mechanisms, and public protest. In the case of the UNSC sanctions on Iraq in the 1990s, it might be said that the main forms of accountability that came into play were public pressure, as well as political pressure within the UN and outside of it. In the case of “targeted” sanctions, the perception that these measures are genuinely limited in their effects has obscured the fact that they are often indiscriminate and disproportionate, raising questions of legitimacy and legality, while undermining efforts at accountability. With regard to unilateral sanctions imposed by states, there are often significant issues of legality, where these measures do not properly constitute either retorsions or countermeasures. While asset freezes and similar blacklists of individuals (SDNs) appear to address the legal and ethical objections to comprehensive sanctions, there are issues related to the lack of due process, with implications for both the legality and legitimacy of these measures.

Economic sanctions are often deployed as political tools, but their impact extends far beyond their intended political targets. This study examines how intensified sanctions on Iran have affected the human security of Afghan migrants, a population already facing structural vulnerabilities. Drawing on fifty-three semi-structured interviews conducted between 2015 and 2018 with Afghan migrants and experts, the research explores two critical dimensions of human security: economic stability and access to healthcare. The findings reveal that while lower- income Afghan workers in unskilled sectors managed to retain employment due to demand for cheap labor, skilled workers and business owners faced significant economic hardship. At the same time, healthcare access deteriorated as financial constraints reduced government support and international assistance failed to meet growing needs. As the Iranian government adjusted its policies to prioritize its own citizens, Afghan migrants were further marginalized. This study underscores the unintended humanitarian consequences of economic sanctions. It highlights the need for a more nuanced approach to policy design. This applies both in the implementation of sanctions and in the response of host governments. A careful approach is necessary to ensure that vulnerable migrants are not disproportionately affected.

The chapter draws lessons from three centuries of economic warfare and sanctions. Establishing cause and effect is difficult because much else was typically changing during periods of conflict. Unintended consequences were everywhere. Impact was followed (and sometimes preceded) by adaptation so that counter-measures blunted the effectiveness of economic warfare measures and sanctions. This does not mean that the original measures were unimportant, because counter-measures were costly to the target country. Civilian lives and interests were collateral damage. Economic warfare and sanctions worked most effectively when complemented by fighting power either engaged in conventional warfare or credibly threatening war as a deterrent, and they were ineffective in its absence.

This chapter addresses some of the many ways that unilateral coercive measures run counter to international human rights law. Such measures may directly compromise the human rights to health, education, economic and social rights, and the right to development as well as sustainable development goals. The chapter addresses the expanding practice of the use of unilateral sanctions, provides an assessment of the possibility of imposing unilateral sanctions as countermeasures or retorsions, and provides an overview of the humanitarian impact of different types of sanctions on different categories of human rights. It looks at the recent developments in sanctioning practice. In particular, as targeted sanctions are usually presented as a good alternative to the comprehensive ones, minimizing humanitarian impact of unilateral measures, the chapter addresses the grounds for targeted unilateral sanctions, assesses their impact on the human rights of directly designated individuals, as well as other people and targeted populations in general. It concludes that listings of individuals regularly run counter to the right to due process. Additionally, most recently unilateral sanctions have compromised internet access, which in turn undermines access to many essential services.

What effect do economic sanctions have on civil society participation in target (sanctioned) countries? Do sanctions help or hurt civic activism in target societies? This chapter explores the degree to which economic sanctions affect the extent of civil engagement in target countries. It is argued that sanctions are likely to contribute to the deterioration of civil society participation in target countries through making non-state groups targets of state repression and impairing those groups’ organizational capacity. To substantiate the theoretical claims, cross- national sanctions data for the period 1989–2015 are combined with data on civil society participation. Results offer robust support that sanctions are detrimental to civil society and the suggested impact of sanctions is likely to be higher in the early rather than later years of sanctions imposition.

Pearl Harbor demonstrates that war can occur when coercion (e.g., economic sanctions) works too well. To investigate this dynamic, we also engage another important, but controversial, question in this case – namely, whether the United States (US) president Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) deliberately sought war with Japan as a way to enter the war in Europe. Contrary to some scholars, our analysis concludes that FDR was aware of the total oil embargo that Acheson implemented and that FDR wanted war. Indeed, the US made only one serious attempt to avoid war – the modus vivendi proposal. FDR supported the proposal because he thought it would give the US more time to prepare. Tojo may have entertained the proposal, but he never received it because Chiang Kai-shek and Churchill vetoed it. The latter needed the US to intervene in the war to increase their chances of winning. This is yet another example of alliances promoting war – in this instance, by vetoing a peace proposal. Finally, we consider why Japan was willing to attack the US, even though it knew the US was more powerful.

The Russian aggression of Ukraine had dramatic effects on the energy and security policy of the EU. Those effects were mainly managed at the national level. The security and military challenge was left to NATO.

Economic tradecraft is a set of duties, responsibilities and skills required of diplomats working in economic affairs. It is a key instrument in the diplomatic tradecraft toolbox. As is the case with their colleagues in the political career track, economic officers work both at diplomatic missions abroad and at headquarters. On the surface, it may appear that a country’s economic and commercial diplomats do the same type of work abroad, but that is not quite the case. Economic officers inform policymaking at headquarters by monitoring and analyzing economic trends and developments in the receiving state. They also advocate for host-government policies aimed at leveling the playing field for companies from the home country and against regulations that hurt those businesses. Commercial diplomats directly help industries and individual companies in starting or expanding business and investment in the host country. Conversely, they facilitate investment by local firms in the home country.