Threats of Economic Sanctions and the Duration of Civil War

Economic sanctions have been criticized as a tool of political expediency. Detractors argue that international leaders use sanctions to give the appearance of action, rather than as a true agent for change. Previous studies largely confirm this characterization, showing that sanctions are not effective. However, previous studies have ignored a major component of the economic coercion process and powerful tactic of negotiation: the threat of sanctions. Using survival analysis and data on civil wars and sanctions from 1960-2005, I find evidence that import restrictions and asset freezes are valuable types of sanctions in shortening the duration of civil war, and that when threats are accounted for, some types of sanctions are shown to have differing effectiveness. But, when standard errors are accounted for, the difference in effectiveness is not significant