An economics, investment, trading and policy blog with a focus on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). We seek the truth, avoid the mainstream and are virulently anti-neoliberalism.
Sunday, September 20, 2015
Matthew Crosston and Dianne Valdez — An Anti-Theory of Sanctions: Why an Iranian New Deal was Necessary
Useful analysis of sanctions as a strategy short of open hostilities. While this is chiefly about Iran, it is easy to extrapolate to Russia, where sanctions are unlikely to have the desired effect either, and may involve unintended consequences that undercut the strategy and undermine objectives, even resulting in blowback.
Sanctions are seldom used as a standalone strategy but involves other operations, including psysops, propaganda, and clandestine operations, which amounts to hybrid warfare. Sanctions are not a substitute for war but warfare conducted by other means than military operations. Military threats are often included though.
New Eastern Outlook
An Anti-Theory of Sanctions: Why an Iranian New Deal was Necessary
Dr. Matthew Crosston, Professor of Political Science and Director of the International Security and Intelligence Studies program at Bellevue University, and Dianne Valdez who just completed her Master’s degree in the International Security and Intelligence Studies Program at Bellevue University in Omaha
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-09/15/did-gchq-spy-on-you-form
Tom, this is really interesting stuff.
Do you want to ask? ;)
Matthew Crosston is excellent.
Sanctions are somewhat like interest rates.
The sactioning body has to periodically remove sanctions, just to gain the ammunition to apply them again. :(
Or ... they could just not bother.
After all, 5% of the world's population can't sanction the other 95% for very long, and expect to survive the consequences.
Post a Comment