Authored by Hekmat Aboukhater via The Mises Institute,
With the anticipated arrival of a second Trump administration in Washington, the world is eager to understand the potential direction of his next term. One of the primary concerns on everyone’s mind is the issue of sanctions.
As of 2024, the United States is actively imposing sanctions on a third of all nations globally. The use of economic sanctions has significantly increased over the years, with the Obama administration averaging 500 new sanctions annually, the first Trump administration doubling it to 1,000 per year, and the Biden administration escalating it further by imposing over 12,000 sanctions in just four years. The question now arises whether a second Trump administration will continue this trend or take a different approach.
US Sanctions: Past and Present
The roots of modern-day sanctions can be traced back to the USA Patriot Act of 2001, specifically Title III, which focused on combating money laundering for terrorist organizations. This led to the establishment of the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which successfully targeted entities like the BDA Bank in Macau suspected of money laundering for North Korea.
Today, the list of sanctioned nations includes Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria, Afghanistan, Balkans, Belarus, Myanmar, Central African Republic, the DRC, Ethiopia, Hong Kong, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Mali, Nicaragua, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Venezuela, and Yemen, among others.
While sanctions have not always achieved their intended goals, they have had significant impacts on the economies and societies of targeted countries. Inflation rates have soared in Venezuela, Syria, and Iran, eroding savings and hindering upward mobility. Sanctions have also bolstered authoritarian leaders by providing them with a common enemy in American imperialism, while draining US goodwill and diplomatic influence worldwide.
The Rise of the Sanctions Industrial Complex
The proliferation of sanctions has given rise to a new entity known as the Sanctions Industrial Complex in Washington, consisting of law firms specializing in sanctions, lobbyist firms with former treasury department officials, and consultancies offering compliance solutions.
Mixed Signals from Trump 2.0
President Trump has played a significant role in expanding the sanctions regime, targeting countries like Russia, Syria, and Venezuela. However, his second term may see a shift in approach, as indicated by his comments on the negative impact of sanctions on the US dollar and the importance of economic engagement over coercion.
While some of Trump’s nominees, like Mike Walz and Marco Rubio, advocate for intensifying sanctions, others, like Tulsi Gabbard, prioritize diplomacy and oppose the use of economic sanctions. Trump’s stance on sanctions in his second term remains uncertain, but his recent comments suggest a potential shift away from coercive measures.
Cautious Optimism
Trump’s remarks offer hope for those opposed to sanctions as tools of warfare, signaling a possible shift towards economic engagement with adversaries. However, reforming the sanctions system will require more than just halting new sanctions. Transparency, accountability, and a proactive approach are needed to address the complexities of the existing sanctions regime.
While the decision to alter the course of the Sanctions Industrial Complex ultimately lies with Washington, the changing global landscape, with countries like China and Saudi Arabia exploring the use of sanctions, highlights the need for a reevaluation of US sanction policies.
Loading…