Will more sanctions against Iran work?
Reader comment on: Can Sanctions Deter Iran?
Submitted by Professor Raymond Tanter (United States), Dec 1, 2009 08:15
Daniel Pollak and Joshua London have written an excellent essay. It also concurs with my own research, which concludes that additional sanctions against Iran will not be an effective deterrent. See http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/mesh/2009/11/will-more-sanctions-against-iran-work/
This is not to say more sanctions should not be tried, because any economic pressure, even if it not decisive, is welcome. And producing consensus for another sanctions round is useful in case force has to be used later. And regarding the most prominent sanctions under consideration, there is little leverage to compel international corporations to suspend gasoline sales to Iran, and Tehran has options for plugging the shortfall and dampening economic damage.
Because of the low likelihood of success of another round of sanctions, breakdown in nuclear talks, and absence of a regime-change alternative focusing on the Iranian opposition, the West is moving toward having to decide between accepting an Iranian nuclear bomb or bombing Iran.
Daniel Pollak and Joshua London would be well-advised to consider a regime-change alternative focusing on the Iranian opposition, particularly the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), which is based in Paris with an extensive presence in Iran. But because the State Department mistakenly characterizes the NCRI and related groups as "terrorist" organizations, they are less able to work with other oppositionists in Iran to effect regime change. In the context of failing diplomacy, as well as problematic economic sanctions and military action, regime change led by a coalition of Iranian dissidents is an alternative whose time has come. A regime change option would reinforce the threat of military action and complement additional sanctions.
Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. This site reserves the right to reject anything found to be objectionable.
Other reader comments on this item
Comment on this item