Why Increased U.S. Sanctions on Iran Don't Work

Fifteen years of sanctions on Iran have taught us one important lesson: They have not produced the intended results. More sanctions are unlikely to produce results now. In fact, additional sanctions, while satisfying some, are more likely to produce results that we do not intend. If we impose increased sanctions, we will likely strengthen President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's hand and risk snuffing out the emerging democracy movement in Iran.

No doubt about it: The Iranian government armed with nuclear weapons is objectionable. And the U.S. must stand firmly on key issues like human rights.

But, Congress needs to give President Barack Obama's diplomatic efforts a chance before increasing sanctions. So far, President Obama's disciplined diplomacy is working. There is finally some progress in dealing with Iran's nuclear aspirations. President Obama's diplomacy has yielded an agreement that increases inspections and verification, and reduces Iran's stockpiles of enriched uranium. This is a good step.

If Congress insists on further sanctions on Iran, it could derail President Obama's diplomatic efforts at this delicate time. Iranian Americans, like Trita Parsi of the National Iranian American Council, agree:

The progress we have seen is partly due to Obama's ability to unite the Security Council. But if Congress moves forward with sanctions that target our allies, the unity will collapse. Where Obama has been a uniter, Congress will become a divider.

Increasing sanctions enables the Iranian president the opportunity to change the subject -- from his failed policies to the nationalistic pride symbolized by nuclear energy. Right now the Iranian people are focused on accountability for abuses committed after an election that was deeply flawed. What the world witnessed this summer was the birth of a civil rights movement in Iran. We need to listen to, help and not hinder the Iranian people at this critical moment.

Iranian leaders like Nobel Laureate Shirin Ebadi and Akbar Ganji tell us that sanctions will only hurt the people of Iran. Opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi has denounced sanctions, saying that anyone who supports his "Green" movement should also oppose additional sanctions. According to Mousavi, "Sanctions would not actually act against the government -- rather, they would only inflict statesmen. We are opposed to any types of sanctions against our nation. This is what living the Green Path means."

Researchers agree that increased sanctions on Iran will not serve U.S. interests. A recent report by the RAND Corporation documented a growing corollary between the power of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, a branch of the military associated with much of Iran's corruption -- and sanctions. With inflation in Iran at over 20 percent and with manufacturing in serious decline, sanctions will only lead to higher prices and greater black-market trade, which is already controlled by the Revolutionary Guard.

Michael Axworthy, a lecturer in Middle Eastern and Iranian history at the University of Exeter in England, thinks that increased U.S. sanctions on Iran are exactly what the Revolutionary Guard wants. He said, "(The Revolutionary Guard) profit by a situation in which there are sanctions and shortages and in which the people can't get what they want, and they are able to control a fairly small stream of what the people want at an inflated price. I don't think the Revolutionary Guard is very likely to put pressure on the Iranian regime to open politically in order to open economically."

Iran has been able to ward off some consequences of sanctions by boosting trade with Russia, China and India. The more we take trade opportunities away from American businesses the more Russian and Chinese businesses step into the vacuum.

Increased sanctions have not worked in Iran. When they do "work," they likely do so at the expense of the poorest and most vulnerable -- as they did in Iraq. Researcher Richard Garfield estimated "a minimum of 100,000 and a more likely estimate of 227,000 excess deaths among young Iraqi children from August 1991 through March 1998" from all causes including sanctions.

Iran's political leaders use polarizing rhetoric to demonize the United States and allies. But they are also shrewd. Increased sanctions at this time, while actually harming their own people, rally and strengthen the nation's resolve to further its nuclear ambitions in the name of self defense. If we fall prey to their trap, we run the risk of losing both a nuclear-free, and a democratic, Iran.

The change we seek in Iran can only be brought about through a disciplined dialogue and determined diplomacy, as President Obama's talks are showing.

Ellison serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

 

Follow Rep. Keith Ellison on Twitter: www.twitter.com/keithellison

Comments

[WarSkeptic]

Thanks to Mr. Ellison for being one of the few to vote against sanctions

Personally I think you are skipping over some logic steps in your reasoning of why but you still came to the right conclusion so I'm happy
The question shouldn't be whether the sanctions will get some kind of desired result, which Ellison is correct that it wouldn't, especially considering sanctions are already in place and have been for decades.
The question should be why would you punish Iran for complying with the NPT?

Its almost as if the US wants them to withdraw from the treaty and start producing nuclear weapons. Hopefully we don't push them to do that.

[Khirad]

Sorry if this tripleposts, pending STILL says 0.

Kudos Mr. Ellison. I would've written much the same in toto. What's to add? Sanctions only benefit the hardliners and the IRGC. They are thus anti-humanitarian both directly and indirectly.

P.S. Had a chat with GOP Reps. Sue Myrick, John Shadegg, Paul Broun, or Trent Franks lately? I'm sure they consider you the ringleader of the Muslim "spies" in D.C.! ;-)

[Mods, that last paragraph was entirely satirical in nature]

[Roozbeh]

I was pro sanctions up to now. But after what I read here I will think twice, provided what Mousavi, Ebadi, and others say is not under any pressure from the government in Tehran.

[Khirad]

I don't believe they are on this issue. This is one that Reformists and Hardliners agree on. I know, I used to be undecided. It is true that Iranians living in rural areas are easily able to connect their gov't's behavior with lack of goods. But, it also provides dual resentment, and worse, can engender hardliner sympathies for standing up to the 'arrogant powers'. The quest for sanctions that only hurt the leadership is quixotic. They can only benefit; and oil is easily smuggled.

[Agent420]

Sanctions usually don' t have much effect. At least in the direction they would like the effect to take. The power people can easily get around any sanctions. If the sanctions have any effect it is on the little people. They suffer while the sanctioning countries are patting themselves on the back for teaching that nation a lesson. The sanctioning people know it is a farce, but they think it will look like they are beings with backbones, but their backbones are made of spaghetti.

[Freenation]

thank you mr. ellison glad to see a rep who is not on aipac payroll...

[Mollabaji]

Strong conclusion with no evidence. Just because he states sanctions don't work? AIPAC is not interested in using sanctions. They want to bomb Iran. They want total change of regime in Iran. So, don't bet on that conclusion.

[MARNIE2]

Sanction on Iran .... ? ....[IF] only the Islamic leader ....or Supreme leader would allowed IAEA ...to
check out nuclear sites years ago . no sanction would be need ? ....ALLthe years the Iranian people sturggled with loss opportunity....they should have had economic prosperity .... thriving jobs of varying degrees. IRAN COULD HAVE BEEN A SUCCESS STORY ..for the people ! cause they were so blessed with [ oil] money it genarites ! & OPPORTUNITYfor all it people ! ......IF.....ONLY the Islamic regime.....IN THEIR RIGHTEOUS TALK ........and ..NOT Allowing the iaea inside it's nuclear sites ?
SANCTION ARE NEED ! ...if Iran can brake these rules ....what other ..rules will Iran brake to achive
its nuclear dream....or ...our..... NIGHTMARE.. !... ?

[bayside]

If congress worked as hard for peace as they do for war ,we the world would have peace and not be in pakistan, afgans, and iraq killing people. It seems as if congress will not be happy until they get iran in this mess. It seems they want the whole middle east embroilled in our war.. No more....It will be interesting in a few years when no one loans United States money to continue the wars ..What will happen to the united states if they cant threaten ..Better start really trying for peace now........

[monelis]

But some forget that AIPAC and Miliary Industrial Complex wants Iranian regime there and alive. Otherwise how could it possible for USA to sell Billion$ & Billion$ of outdated weapons to our so called friends (dictators) in the Middle East, while Israel receives Billion$ & Billion$ of US Tax Payers Dollars each year.

Thanks to the Iranian Regime all that possible now and if you want to increase the taste and sale$ just once in awhile add some Nuclear spices in there.

[Ahsanm]

Absolutely correct! the simplest approach is to 1) follow the money and 2) figure out who will benefit most. In both cases the answer is our "only thriving" Miliary Industrial Complex. Having worked for one, i can testify how much they love wars.

[Khirad]

Netanyahu was practically rooting for Ahmadinejad before June, 12th. Ask yourselves why.

[madnarc]

Your post has merit, however, it would be wise to take into account one specific country. Russia. There will never be any sanctions on Iran until Russia is brought on board so what you say really is a moot point. We disbanded the idea of the Defense Missle Network in Europe in hopes of bringing Russia more in line with our thoughts on Iran. Russia snubed us and barely acknowledged our olive branch.

VP Biden then went to Central Europe and bad mouthed Russia. The idea behind this is to put Russia back on notice that we haven't forgotten about them. Russia is trying to strengthen its position in theater and has made some real progress with Germany especially. Although they were once bitter enemies, Russia provided bailout money for German companies thereby getting Chancellor Merkel to lighten up on her stance against them. They were even instrumental in getting her re-elected this year. Since then, Russia has been giving money to any German company who wishes to do business in Russia.

Russia is gaining strength and as long as we are engaged in the Middle East, we don't have the time or the resources to pay as close attention to Russia as we should. The old Bear is waking up and is quietly gaining strength. We better be aware.

[William50]

It is nice to have your views expanded on, it also shows that Washington is reading the blogs and they do not have an idea of their own. If, Washington in 1970 had started to open Cuba to business interests perhaps Cuba today would be a strong trading partner and no longer communistic.
If We stated that we were willing to begin trade with Iraq, opening business with them and funding small private business leaders we would see more unrest in the country as the people demanded more, food, goods and work.
America can destroy any part of any nation that threatens us. But to defeat an entrenched government, a government that says America is the devil we only have to let the people start working and wanting more. Yes we have the bat to swat them with, we also have the sugar to defeat their closed government!
middleamerican2010
Casey

[bluescat47]

Dialogue and diplomacy are not going to work without economic pressure. The Europeans tried that for a decade and what was the end result? Absolutely nothing, just more Iranian duplicity as manifested by the lastest "discovery" of a secret nuclear enrichment facility by the Iranians.The sanctions are having an impact on the economy and Ahmeinijad has paid for it in declining support. Iran and the revolutionary guard must pay for their continued support of terrorism, their threats to destroy another member of the international community, and their efforts to develop nuclear weapons, which would destabilize the region and force the Saudis and others to turn to the nuclear option. To think that Ahmeinijad, who believes that the 12th Imam will appear out of occultation and destroy the West in an end of days event (destroying one third of humanity) will respond to "dialogue" without economic pressure is hopelessly naive.

[Brewerstroupe]

"more Iranian duplicity as manifested by the lastest "discovery" of a secret nuclear enrichment facility"

The Iranians declared the facility eighteen months earlier than required to under the NPT. How can this be "duplicity"?

"Ahmeinijad has paid for it in declining support"

Not according to the polls:

http://www.counterpunch.org/amin06222009.html

"Iran and the revolutionary guard must pay for their continued support of terrorism"

Be a sweetheart and post a link to the evidence. Meantime tell us who will pay for the support of Jundullah?

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=97484&sectionid=351020101
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1543798/US-funds-terror-groups-to-sow-chaos-in-Iran.html

[Khirad]

I responded to you, it didn't go through. I'm tired. You're half-right on a few things, that's all I'll say now. And for goodness sake, try to abstain from citing PressTV.

[S1m0n]

Diplomacy and sanctions are both working fine. We're inspecting all their facilities regularly, and we've found no sign of an illegal program.

In fact, we've demanded - and recieved - access to many more sites, sooner, and more often than Iran's obligations under the NPT require, and there continues to be no indication that anything's amiss.

[Ahsanm]

bluescat47, in case you don't know, our foreign policy is based on hypocracy. Everyone knows that Israel has Nuclear wepons but US does not want to disarm them or threaten them to blow their facilities. WMD's of Israel are a threat, not only to Iran but entire ME Muslim countries. You mentioned about a hypothetical 12th Imam, appearing out of now where. When do you think "end of times" will come? Has Ahmadenijad mentioned to you or anybody?

[Fein]

What needs to be publicly addressed is the fact that U.S.'s policy of sanctioning Iran policy is heavily influenced by Israeli nuclear blackmail.

[research]

It would be a lot easier to talk nations into giving up all nukes, power and bombs, if the USA would stop promoting nuclear power.

[Tavallai]

Leave Iran ALONE.

[bayside]

If you lived in a country surrounded by countries with nukes which seems to be the only deterrent to takeovers and were within striking distance of unstable istrael who invades other countries regularly, you would want a nuke too. Why cant iran have a nuke but unstable north korea, israel,pakistan all countries we gave them nukes or plans can.. Sanctions should be on united states for the so called democracy we gave to innocent iraqs.