US Sanctions Are Designed to Kill — Kevin Cashman & Cavan Kharrazian

Sanctions are being used against some countries as economic warfare rather than primarily political pressure, and there will be casualties as in any war including "collateral damage." Some people will die. The perps know this.

It should be clear that the United States is uniquely positioned to choke off imports and exports from a targeted country using sanctions with deep, negative consequences for that country’s economy, as well as severe constraints on its government’s ability to address economic problems.

In Iran’s case, US sanctions mean that production of oil — a vital export — is in free fall, unemployment is on the rise, and record inflation due to scarce imports has made it harder for everyday Iranians to buy basic goods and access life-saving medicine. Recent reports have detailed harrowing stories of hospitals running out of crucial cancer medicinesand patients struggling to afford or even find their prescriptions. As in Venezuela and other targeted countries, US sanctions undoubtedly have a human toll associated with them, which will only grow as time goes on. This human impact is one of the main reasons that experts in international law argue unilateral sanctions are illegal under the United Nations Charter and international human rights law.
While Iran has been exploring alternative ways of exporting and importing goods, it’s unclear what more it could do absent relief from sanctions. Even so, US officials will typically place responsibility for the social and economic problems resulting from the sanctions on the Iranian government, as Hook does. But Trump’s comments are more revealing. Sanctions only work because they cause [indiscriminate] suffering in the first place. In effect, the United States is risking — and sometimes ending — the lives of thousands of Iranians with the hope that the Iranian government acquiesces to its demands or is replaced by a more compliant government. That the United States could carry out such a strategy in the first place should raise serious questions among concerned US citizens and within the international community, especially among those who respect international law.

Jacobin
US Sanctions Are Designed to Kill
Kevin Cashman, senior associate at the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC., and Cavan Kharrazian, researcher at the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC.

Pepe Escobar — What sanctions on Russia and China really mean

The Pentagon may not be advocating total war against both Russia and China – as it has been interpreted in some quarters

Look at the behavior and its motives rather than the speech and spin.

Global hegemony is a zero-sum game for the US. The stakes could not be higher. Obviously, the US has not built the military it has to defend the homeland or even its allies.

The US would prefer to prevail through hybrid means rather than kinetically, but if not ....

Even an amateur in international relations, geopolitics, or geostrategy, as well as history, could figure this out easily. But the US has already declared it as policy in the Wolfowitz and Bush doctrines. and recently named Russia and China as the chief adversaries. 

Equally obviously, when backed to a corner, great powers respond.

This is a trajectory toward WWIII.

Asia Times
What sanctions on Russia and China really mean

Pepe Escobar

Decameron — Who's on the Iran Action Group? More About Neo-Cons' March through the Institutions

Like most neo-con thinkers, Hook advocates crushing, crippling sanctions that supposedly will suffocate the population to the point that there will be an uprising that overthrows the regime. It's a form of collective punishment--a neo-con pipe dream that destroys nations and people. Hook's mission on Iran is described as coming from Pompeo at the State Dept, but well-placed sources say it's a National Security Council operation, and Bolton's brainchild....

Sic Semper Tyrannis
Who's on the Iran Action Group? More About Neo-Cons' March through the Institutions

Decameron

see also at SST

Stated policy means nothing without some kind of implementation. This Washington Post article describes how CENTCOM is already implementing the stated Syria policy on the ground in al Tanf. In my opinion, we stand a good chance of deconflicting ourselves into a hot war. God help us all.

From Policy to Action
The Twisted Genius

Also from TTG at SST

At some point even the most ardent Trump acolyte will have to admit this is now Trump’s policy. It is not something done by the neocons, the deep state, the anonymous resister or the ghost of John McCain without Trump's acquiescence. He is not some clueless, oblivious Governor Willian J. LePetomane. Trump may not give a rat’s ass about Israel, the Palestinians or Assad, but he has a real hard on against Iran or to be more exact, Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran. It’s all personal. The recently stated Syria policy is all about Iran. Now he’s tweeting warnings to Assad and Putin to leave Idlib alone. He’s not thinking geopolitically. It’s becoming more personal with every tweet. If Putin and Assad defy Trump’s tweet warnings, as they surely will, he’s liable to strike back in rage. And all those around him will goad him on. And then, good buddy, the shit will truly be on.

What is this Administration’s real policy towards Syria? The Twisted Genius

Patrick Cockburn — It’s time we saw economic sanctions for what they really are – war crimes

The record of economic sanctions in forcing political change is dismal, but as a way of reducing a country to poverty and misery it is difficult to beat. UN sanctions were imposed against Iraq from 1990 until 2003. Supposedly, it was directed against Saddam Hussein and his regime, though it did nothing to dislodge or weaken them: on the contrary, the Baathist political elite took advantage of the scarcity of various items to enrich themselves by becoming the sole suppliers.…

There is nothing very new in this. Economic sanctions are like a medieval siege but with a modern PR apparatus attached to justify what is being done. A difference is that such sieges used to be directed at starving out a single town or city while now they are aimed at squeezing whole countries into submission....

Non-combatants bear the brunt of economic warfare. This is not "collateral damage." A civilian population is targeted intentionally in the expectation of fomenting internal strife that will weaken the regime, and ideally spark revolt.

Independent (UK)

It’s time we saw economic sanctions for what they really are – war crimes

Patrick Cockburn

Chris Scott — China passive aggressively sanctions S Korea in response to THAAD

China imposes economic sanctions against Taiwan in response to missile threat.

Asia Times
China passive aggressively sanctions S Korea in response to THAAD
Chris Scott

See also

Reuters
China hints at trade war strategy in South Korea standoff
Adam Jourdan

Christopher Smart — Sanctions and the Risk to the Dollar

This guy is as establishment as they come and he is warning about abusing power. That's how power is eventually lost.

Project Syndicate
Sanctions and the Risk to the Dollar
Christopher Smart, a senior fellow at the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government, was Special Assistant to the president for International Economics, Trade and Investment (2013-15) and Deputy Assistant Secretary of Treasury for Europe and Eurasia (2009-13). He is also Whitehead Senior Fellow at Chatham House