Are sanctions and condemnation effective in curbing unruly nations?

[khemist]

Besides wasting oxygen, what effect do sanctions and condemnations towards "unruly" nations actually have?

 

[rootX]

I also wanted to start something similar ..

https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3277916&postcount=25

It is incomplete to bring up one or two examples to prove something "too broad" so I was hoping to look into at all the sanctions in the past and their impact (too time consuming and heavy effort).

OP (or anyone else), I will be really glad if you can bring up some evidence behind what being said.

Starting point: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/hrj/iss18/geiss.pdf

 

[vertices]

When they're imposed against a brutal regime, they actually empower the regime whilst making its citizens suffer - take Iraq for example: millions of children died as a result of UN sanctions whilst Sadam Hussein hold of power was immeasurably strengthened.

They did however work in South Africa - they were a contributing factor to the ending of Apartheid.

 

[rootX]

They did however work in South Africa - they were a contributing factor to the ending of Apartheid.

Not so ..

SANCTIONS ON SOUTH AFRICA: WHAT DID THEY DO?
Philip I. Levy (Yale University)
http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&sourc...Eb9eG0_DA&sig2=TI2WcBTs22bfoY5aC2LvRg&cad=rja

Abstract
This paper considers the economic sanctions that were applied in the mid-1980s to
pressure the South African government to end apartheid. It asks what role those sanctions
played in the eventual demise of the apartheid regime and concludes that the role was
probably very small. An alternative explanation for the regime change is offered: the
communist bloc combined to bring about the change. If one is to argue for the efficacy of
sanctions, two key obstacles are their limited economic impact and the substantial lag
between the imposition of sanctions and the political change. Since sanctions preceded
the change of government, it is impossible to rule them out as a determinant. However,
their principal effect was probably psychological. The implication is that the South
African case should not serve as the lone major instance of effective sanctions.

 

[arildno]

Condemnations craft political consensus within the nation(s) issuing the condemnation.
And that need not be a bad thing at all.

 

[AlephZero]

When they're imposed against a brutal regime, they actually empower the regime whilst making its citizens suffer

You have to consider the maginal amount of extra empowerment, not the absolute level. Almost by definition, a brutal regime has already "empowered" itself to do whatever it feels like doing.

But I tend to agree with Arildno, it may be more about giving the rest of the world legitimacy to express its opinions freely, and ostracizing the overt or covert supporters of the unuily regime, rather than the direct economic consequence of the sanctions.