5 ms·

>This will likely have no consequences to the regime in Belarus That's the problem with sanctions, at some point you run of of things to take away. From then o

>This will likely have no consequences to the regime in Belarus That's the problem with sanctions, at some point you run of of things to take away. From then on your target can pretty much do what ever they want, knowing that things can't really get any worse.

TheOtherHobbes 5y ago
Current sanctions on Belarus are somewhere between light and negligible. There are a lot more things that could be taken away.
- morelisp 5y ago
  Expanding the sanctions to affect the entire country / citizenry has the side-effect of pushing populism there even closer to Russia, materially and emotionally, without having much effect on the actual bad actors beyond what the current sanctions do. Traditionally a next step would be political, then material, support for an organized internal opposition, but there doesn't seem to be an obvious one in this case.
  - ivan_gammel 5y ago
    Economic sanctions can be aimed at Belarusian elites and state enterprises: ban on direct export to Belarus of luxury goods, advanced technology, ban on certain imports etc. At the same time freedom of movement with transit routes via Russia or Ukraine should be encouraged, to support low-volume trade and grey market. The bigger is shadow economy and the less concentrated is private sector, the more difficult is it for the regime to control it. It stimulates low level corruption and reduces loyalty of the law enforcement, increasing the chances of the opposition in the future.
    - morelisp 5y ago
      > Economic sanctions can be aimed at Belarusian elites and state enterprises Yes, this is already happening since last year, and was already scheduled to be expanded for a fourth time in June. I assume this clinches that, and probably more. But the fact nobody seems to know there's been sanctions since last year suggests my other point - they're woefully ineffective as long as they can get other support.
  - Touche 5y ago
    Sanctions are almost always too weak. Any sanction that the government can withstand is too weak and will have the affect you describe. A strong sanction that says "release the prisoner immediately" will be short and not affect citizens long enough to create such a sentiment.
    - morelisp 5y ago
      What kind of sanction do you have in mind?
      - Touche 5y ago
        No use of airspace and no trade with NATO countries until the prisoners are released. It would take a week.
        morelisp 5y ago
        No use of airspace is already being discussed and likely going to happen. NATO is a military alliance, not a trade union. There's no way for them to organize what you're suggesting. > It would take a week. Fidel might like to have a word with you...
        bluGill 5y ago
        NATO members do talk to each other over a lot of different channels. It will take more than a week to organize, but it can be done.
        morelisp 5y ago
        But it will be as e.g. an EU action, not a NATO action. (I have doubts they will get anyone on the west side of the Atlantic to sign on, but I hope I'm wrong.) And the EU has already been acting. My point is: There's a lot of people in this thread demanding a vague "something" be done, but it's really not clear whether there is "something" between what the EU's plan has already been for months and a hot war, other than some ill-considered immediate panic.
mikro2nd 5y ago
Not so. Sanctions can be devastatingly effective applied by a significant majority of the world over a length of time. Sanctions were the instrument that brought an end to the Apartheid regime in South Africa: sanctions, having brought the South African economy to its knees, were a key factor in forcing the ruling regime to the negotiating table. Yes, in some fairytale world the ruling National Party could have continued "doing whatever they want". Here in reality things would certainly have got worse, and the National Party government could see that the end-game was inescapable. Sanctions worked then, and they'll work again.
- boomboomsubban 5y ago
  Let's ignore how ridiculous it is to give the West the credit for ending apartheid and that the economic growth of South Africa really doesn't back up your claim that sanctions were the key. Even assuming you're right about the cause, the success story of sanctions would be a South African economy that never recovered leading to the suffering of millions. That's what happens when they "work."
- bmmayer1 5y ago
  I know a little about this; it's pretty controversial, historically, whether Western sanctions, vs. decades of civil war and violent insurrection (often backed by subvert support from the Kremlin with the CIA playing defense) in SA and neighboring states were the catalyst. There are plenty of historians / economists who would argue that sanctions made things worse for the people of South Africa (much the same is said today about sanctions against Iran). In any event, that sanctions where "the" instrument that brought an end to apartheid should not be stated as if it were a universally accepted fact.
- elliekelly 5y ago
  What about Cuba? North Korea? Iran? They’ve been sanctioned for decades with devastating human consequences and little to no sign of those sanctions spurring any meaningful change.
  - vertis 5y ago
dorgo 5y ago
>, knowing that things can't really get any worse. But also knowing that things can get better. The incentive to do the "right" thing doesn't disappear. It only can't be increased further.

TheOtherHobbes 5y ago

Current sanctions on Belarus are somewhere between light and negligible. There are a lot more things that could be taken away.

morelisp 5y ago
Expanding the sanctions to affect the entire country / citizenry has the side-effect of pushing populism there even closer to Russia, materially and emotionally, without having much effect on the actual bad actors beyond what the current sanctions do. Traditionally a next step would be political, then material, support for an organized internal opposition, but there doesn't seem to be an obvious one in this case.
- ivan_gammel 5y ago
  Economic sanctions can be aimed at Belarusian elites and state enterprises: ban on direct export to Belarus of luxury goods, advanced technology, ban on certain imports etc. At the same time freedom of movement with transit routes via Russia or Ukraine should be encouraged, to support low-volume trade and grey market. The bigger is shadow economy and the less concentrated is private sector, the more difficult is it for the regime to control it. It stimulates low level corruption and reduces loyalty of the law enforcement, increasing the chances of the opposition in the future.
  - morelisp 5y ago
    > Economic sanctions can be aimed at Belarusian elites and state enterprises Yes, this is already happening since last year, and was already scheduled to be expanded for a fourth time in June. I assume this clinches that, and probably more. But the fact nobody seems to know there's been sanctions since last year suggests my other point - they're woefully ineffective as long as they can get other support.
- Touche 5y ago
  Sanctions are almost always too weak. Any sanction that the government can withstand is too weak and will have the affect you describe. A strong sanction that says "release the prisoner immediately" will be short and not affect citizens long enough to create such a sentiment.
  - morelisp 5y ago
    What kind of sanction do you have in mind?
    - Touche 5y ago
      No use of airspace and no trade with NATO countries until the prisoners are released. It would take a week.
      - morelisp 5y ago
        No use of airspace is already being discussed and likely going to happen. NATO is a military alliance, not a trade union. There's no way for them to organize what you're suggesting. > It would take a week. Fidel might like to have a word with you...
        bluGill 5y ago
        NATO members do talk to each other over a lot of different channels. It will take more than a week to organize, but it can be done.
        morelisp 5y ago
        But it will be as e.g. an EU action, not a NATO action. (I have doubts they will get anyone on the west side of the Atlantic to sign on, but I hope I'm wrong.) And the EU has already been acting. My point is: There's a lot of people in this thread demanding a vague "something" be done, but it's really not clear whether there is "something" between what the EU's plan has already been for months and a hot war, other than some ill-considered immediate panic.

mikro2nd 5y ago

Not so. Sanctions can be devastatingly effective applied by a significant majority of the world over a length of time. Sanctions were the instrument that brought an end to the Apartheid regime in South Africa: sanctions, having brought the South African economy to its knees, were a key factor in forcing the ruling regime to the negotiating table. Yes, in some fairytale world the ruling National Party could have continued "doing whatever they want". Here in reality things would certainly have got worse, and the National Party government could see that the end-game was inescapable. Sanctions worked then, and they'll work again.

boomboomsubban 5y ago
Let's ignore how ridiculous it is to give the West the credit for ending apartheid and that the economic growth of South Africa really doesn't back up your claim that sanctions were the key. Even assuming you're right about the cause, the success story of sanctions would be a South African economy that never recovered leading to the suffering of millions. That's what happens when they "work."
bmmayer1 5y ago
I know a little about this; it's pretty controversial, historically, whether Western sanctions, vs. decades of civil war and violent insurrection (often backed by subvert support from the Kremlin with the CIA playing defense) in SA and neighboring states were the catalyst. There are plenty of historians / economists who would argue that sanctions made things worse for the people of South Africa (much the same is said today about sanctions against Iran). In any event, that sanctions where "the" instrument that brought an end to apartheid should not be stated as if it were a universally accepted fact.
elliekelly 5y ago
What about Cuba? North Korea? Iran? They’ve been sanctioned for decades with devastating human consequences and little to no sign of those sanctions spurring any meaningful change.
- vertis 5y ago

dorgo 5y ago

>, knowing that things can't really get any worse. But also knowing that things can get better. The incentive to do the "right" thing doesn't disappear. It only can't be increased further.