An analysis of the effectiveness of sanctions in the age of nonpolarity: the case of Iran

This research study aims at interrogating the utility and futility of sanctions as a weapon in the diplomatic circles in the face of increasing Nonpolarism that chiefly characterizes the current and future international system. Apparently it becomes clear how important it is to explore in the first chapter the relationship between sanctions and nonpolarity before critically analyzing the manifestations of such a relationship in chapter four. The aim of all this is also to establish the wisdom that is, as of now and perhaps in the future, there in using sanctions for whichever cause. This is expected to be established after having assessed the invincibility of the forces that constitute the entire phenomenon of Nonpolarism which are working against the success of sanctions. This study therefore centers on Iran as its case study since it has been a target of some of the harshest sanctions regime in history since 1979 to present (2013). Although the Iranian economy has felt the blows of numerous rounds of multilateral and unilateral sanctions, it is far from collapse and the regime has never been shaken with such a magnitude as that which can cause its overthrow. This sends a clear and strong signal to the proponents of sanctions that alert them to either revise coercive diplomacy as a foreign policy tool or to altogether dump such a tool for other alternatives. The dismal performance of sanctions is not only evident in the Iranian case as Zimbabwe, Cuba and the Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea are also viewed and used as cross references. This draws the researcher to one significant conclusion which forms the central argument of this study that nonpolarity has worked against the effectiveness of sanctions and as an eventuality sanctions are losing relevance and may have no space in international politics in the near future. Besides assessing the prospects of sanctions in the age of nonpolarity, the discussion is narrowed down to even assess the chances that Iran holds to survive in its bitter fight against international sanctions. Such an analysis involves the a critical understanding of the various counter measures and mechanisms that the target states like Iran are employing to camouflage self from the planned and destructive effects of sanctions. Although this argument has been stressed by a host of scholars, this study also concludes by stating that while war is diplomacy by other means, sanctions are also war by other means. This reasoning is informed by the parallels that one can easily draw between the effects of war and that of a well coordinated sanctions imposition effort. Although no argument is entirely conclusive in the academic circles, it represents the maximum levels of naivety to advocate for the adoption of sanctions against what are deemed as rogue states after going through this stud