Social Commentator, Gimba Kakanda says sanctions are never been effective in foreign policy decision-making, in the light of US-China trade war and Trump’s decision to ban Huawei.
Kakanda said this in a series of tweets on his official and verified twitter account.
He said, ” I’m going to share a short piece on how sanctions have hardly or never been effective in foreign policy decision-making, in the light of US-China trade war and Trump’s decision to ban Huawei.”
“Sanctions are intended to signal the sanctioner’s intention or influence domestic politics of the sanctioned states, but available historical records show that sanctions are largely terrible ideas. They have never ever really produced desired outcomes. I’ll cite a few examples.”
“During the Cold War, the UN Security Council banned apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia to signal its intention towards their repressive regimes. While South Africa grew militarily, Rhodesia cushioned its economy by buying food products from neighbouring countries like Tanzania.”
“The 1974 Jackson-Vanik Amendment of the United States “targeted” communist states of China and the Soviet Union – for “violating human rights” – but it created an outcome that favoured these targeted states. It got their citizens to “rally around their flag” – to be nationalists.”
“When Western states, including Russia, agreed to sanction Iraq for invading Kuwait in 1990, Iraq began to sell its Oil in the global market through Jordan. The expected collapse of Iraqi economy never happened because France and Russia couldn’t resist the trading wish Saddam.”
“China is partly what it is today because of the humiliating impact of sanctions, following the 1989 Tiananmen Square incident. It’s a moment of realization for China to think of a future independent of the West, and sound economic policies have led to emergence of powerful China.”
“So Trump’s resort to sanction in a more economically interdependent world, and targeting a stabler China with nationally conscious citizens, is a miscalculated strategy to get at Beijing. Among many things, America’s investments are going to be vastly affected in this war.”
“US-China trade war will only catalyze the “rally around the flag” effect among the Chinese, motivating them to ally with their home country against the United States. I’m already reading reports of Chinese citizens rushing to get Huawei phones and ditching American-made phones.”
“Washington is being misled to believe it has less to to lose in coercing China to settle for its economic bargain, but that would be selfish because American investors have vast investments in China, and pushing China to respond in kind would produce mutually assured destruction.”
“Over all, China’s positive economic statecraft across Africa, Central Asia and Latin America is a stabilizer for the consequences of what the trade war is likely to trigger. America is declining, and Washington is failing to see that it no longer monopolizes the global market.”