The Impact of the UN Sanctions on the People of Iraq

Halliday, D.

doi:10.1525/jps.1999.28.2.00p02087

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As many authors have noted (e.g. Halliday 1999;Alnasrawi 2001;Sponeck 2006), Iraq imports 70-80% of its caloric 2 Although sanctions imposed by UNSC Resolution 661 were lifted by UNSC Resolution 686 (1991) following the Gulf War and the withdrawal of Iraq from Kuwait, UNSC Resolution 687 continued to hold Iraq accountable for paying war damages and its continuing threat to support terrorism and develop weapons of mass destruction (WMD). This new comprehensive resolution included a long list of requirements for the lifting of sanctions, including the elimination of WMD, agreement not to develop WMD in the future, establishment of an inspections regime to monitor compliance, and adherence to debt obligations and other financial claims (UNSC Resolution 687).…”

Section: Limiting the Institution Of War Since The End Of The Cold Warmentioning

confidence: 99%

International Organization in the Anarchical Society

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International sanctioning is an idea which became a right, in certain circumstances a duty, and is now a practice. While acknowledging that the status of international sanctioning as an institution of international society is difficult to prove (Wilson 2012), this chapter assumes that the practice is now sufficiently complex and deep to make reference to it as an institution reasonable. If so, what kind of institution is it? The burgeoning literature on 'primary' or 'fundamental' institutions suggests several possibilities. It could be seen as a 'procedural' institution along with inter alia diplomacy, trade and war, the purpose of which is to protect and support the 'foundational' institutions of sovereignty, territoriality and international law (Holsti 2004, 21-27). It could be seen as a 'derivative' institution (along with non-intervention and law) of the 'master' institution of sovereignty; or alternatively a derivative institution (along with alliances, war and the balance of power) of the master institution of great power management (Buzan 2004, 161-204). Different English School theorists have different schemes and a settled scheme has yet to emerge. This does not, however, prevent us from exploring the relationship between institutions, and the purpose of this chapter is to explore the reciprocal effects of the increasingly institutionalized practice of sanctions on the institutions (whether foundational, master, procedural or derivative) of war and great power management.The chapter begins by exploring the concept of international sanctions as a practice for states to collectively punish the violation of pivotal international norms through the institutionalized authority of international organizations. Rather than considering sanctions as a purely instrumental foreign policy tool, we conceptualize international sanctions as a way for states to reaffirm core constitutive principles of international society, stigmatize transgressors, and deter future norm violations. The chapter then broadly charts the development of international sanctions from the Concert of Europe to the early 21 st century and traces how international sanctions as a practice shaped the institutions of great power management and war. In so doing, we show how 'secondary' institutions, primarily the United Nations, through institutionalized 2 practices such as international sanctions, can change the understanding or shape the transformation of certain primary institutions. International Sanctions as Communal PenaltiesInternational sanctions are measures taken collectively by states to ensure compliance with major international norms. They are measures taken in extremis when lesser means have failed to bring about the desired result. Hence, these measures are rarely isolated practices but form part of international society's toolkit to uphold and enforce norms. Sanctions can be diplomatic, social, cultural, economic and military. The logic of sanctions is simple: breach major international norms and collectively imposed costs will follow...

show abstract

Section: Limiting the Institution Of War Since The End Of The Cold Warmentioning

confidence: 99%

International Organization in the Anarchical Society

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As many authors have noted (e.g. Halliday 1999;Alnasrawi 2001;Sponeck 2006), Iraq imports 70-80% of its caloric intake, and long-term international sanctions against Iraq had dire humanitarian consequences despite the introduction, in an effort to alleviate civilian suffering, of the controversial Oil-For-Food program in 1996 3 . The humanitarian situation created dissent among the great powers as France and Russia opposed further sanctions by the mid-1990s.…”

Section: Limiting the Institution Of War Since The End Of The Cold Warmentioning

confidence: 99%

International Sanctions as a Primary Institution of International Society

Wilson

Yao

2018

International Organization in the Anarchical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Comprehensive trade sanctions have also been criticised due to their excessive human costs, as demonstrated in Iraq during the 1990s (Halliday 1999). Indeed, the fact that it was military action that ultimately toppled Saddam Hussein only served to increase the general pessimism towards trade sanctions as a tool of foreign policy.…”

Section: From Trade To Financial Sanctionsmentioning

confidence: 99%