By Namith DP | July 01, 2025
Introduction
Global sanctions have become central to modern international relations, influencing everything from geopolitical strategy to financial markets and humanitarian operations. As of 2024, more than 30 countries are subject to active sanctions, ranging from comprehensive embargoes to narrowly targeted measures. These tools—used primarily by states, coalitions like the European Union, or institutions such as the United Nations—aim to compel, deter, punish, or shame entities that violate international norms.
Despite their frequency and growing complexity, sanctions remain poorly understood outside policy circles. Misinterpretation of their intent, scope, and impact often leads to overcompliance, economic instability, and diplomatic friction. This article decodes the architecture of global sanctions, explains their legal and institutional basis, and outlines how they reshape the real economy, global finance, and supply chains.
Part A: Understanding the Fundamentals of Sanctions
What Are Sanctions? A Structural Overview
Sanctions are restrictive measures imposed by a state or international body to alter the behavior of another state, non-state actor, or individual. They fall into several major categories:
1. Economic Sanctions
These restrict trade, financial transactions, or access to capital markets.
Example: U.S. sanctions on Iran’s oil exports since 2018 have reduced its oil revenue by over 50%, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).
2. Financial Sanctions
These block access to banking systems, freeze assets, or prohibit dealings with specific institutions.
Example: The 2022 SWIFT ban on select Russian banks eliminated their access to international financial messaging systems, severely disrupting cross-border payments.
3. Travel Bans and Visa Restrictions
Used against individuals, these sanctions limit freedom of movement for political leaders, military personnel, or sanctioned business executives.
Example: The United Kingdom imposed travel bans on senior Iranian officials for their role in domestic human rights violations.
4. Arms Embargoes
These prohibit the export or import of weapons and dual-use goods.
Example: The United Nations has had an arms embargo in place against North Korea since 2006, following nuclear tests.
5. Sectoral Sanctions
These target specific industries such as energy, defense, or finance.
Example: The EU’s sectoral sanctions on Russia’s oil, defense, and aviation sectors reduced Russia’s GDP by an estimated 2.5% in 2022.
Who Imposes Sanctions? Key Authorities
1. United Nations Security Council (UNSC)
UNSC sanctions are binding on all 193 UN member states. They require consensus among the five permanent members (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States), making them difficult to enact but powerful in reach.
- The UN currently maintains 14 active sanctions regimes.
2. United States Government
The U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) under the Department of the Treasury administers sanctions with global reach due to the dominance of the U.S. dollar.
- As of 2024, over 12,000 entities and individuals are listed on OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) List.
3. European Union
The EU uses sanctions as part of its Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). Measures include asset freezes, arms embargoes, and sector-specific restrictions.
- The EU currently applies sanctions to more than 40 countries and regimes.
4. Other National and Regional Actors
Countries like Canada, Australia, Japan, and the United Kingdom maintain autonomous sanctions regimes that often coordinate with larger coalitions.
- The UK’s post-Brexit sanctions framework under the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 gives it independent sanctioning authority.
How Sanctions Are Enforced
Enforcement relies on legal obligations, surveillance technologies, and financial institution compliance. Methods include:
- Monitoring Transactions: Banks use sanctions screening software to detect blacklisted individuals and transactions.
- Blocking Assets: Governments can freeze financial assets held in their jurisdictions.
- Legal Penalties: Violating sanctions can result in significant penalties. In 2023, British American Tobacco paid over $600 million for violating U.S. sanctions on North Korea.
Why Sanctions Matter: Global Power and Economic Influence
Sanctions shape geopolitical alignments and economic realities. Their strategic objectives include:
- Coercing Policy Change: Sanctions against apartheid-era South Africa contributed to internal political reform.
- Disrupting Conflict Financing: Targeted sanctions on terrorist networks freeze access to resources.
- Maintaining International Norms: Sanctions act as tools to uphold international law, particularly in cases involving weapons proliferation and human rights violations.
However, unintended consequences are common. For instance:
- Humanitarian Impact: Sanctions on Venezuela contributed to shortages in medical supplies, even though humanitarian goods were technically exempt.
- Collateral Economic Damage: EU sanctions on Belarus caused supply disruptions for European chemical industries relying on Belarusian potash exports.
The Rise of Secondary Sanctions
Secondary sanctions penalize third parties doing business with sanctioned entities, expanding the reach of the originating country.
Example: In 2020, the U.S. imposed secondary sanctions on Chinese firms trading with Iran. This led to financial decoupling between Chinese banks and U.S. dollar markets.
This approach, although effective in coercion, has also spurred:
- De-dollarization: Russia and China increased transactions in yuan and rubles to avoid U.S. sanctions exposure.
- Overcompliance: Fear of penalties causes global firms to withdraw even from legal transactions.
Example: Many European firms exited Iran after the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA, despite EU efforts to maintain trade.
Sanctions Are Not a One-Size-Fits-All Tool
Their effectiveness depends on several variables:
- Target Resilience: Countries with diversified trade partners or strong state control can withstand prolonged sanctions.
- Coalition Support: Multilateral sanctions tend to be more effective than unilateral ones.
- Timing and Exit Strategy: Sanctions without clear conditions for relief often lose strategic value and legitimacy.
Part B: Case Studies on Sanctions — Successes, Failures, and Complex Outcomes
Case Study 1: Russia – Sectoral Sanctions and Geo-economic Pushback
Background
In response to the 2014 annexation of Crimea and the 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the U.S., EU, UK, and other allies imposed extensive sanctions on Russia. These include:
- Financial sanctions on major Russian banks (e.g., Sberbank, VTB)
- Export controls on technology and military components
- Import bans on Russian oil and gas
- Travel bans and asset freezes on hundreds of individuals and entities
Impact
- GDP Decline: Russia’s GDP shrank by 2.1% in 2022.
- Inflation Spike: Annual inflation peaked at over 17% in 2022.
- Export Diversification: Russia shifted energy exports to China and India, offsetting some of the European losses.
Evaluation
- Partial Success: Sanctions severely restricted Russia’s access to global finance and high-tech imports but failed to halt the war or cause political reform.
- Unintended Outcome: Accelerated global trends toward de-dollarization and increased trade in yuan.
Case Study 2: Iran – Maximum Pressure vs. Strategic Resilience
Background
Iran has faced U.S. sanctions since 1979, which intensified under the “maximum pressure” campaign launched in 2018 after the U.S. withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Key sanctions included:
- Total ban on Iranian oil exports
- Secondary sanctions on foreign firms doing business with Iran
- Restrictions on access to the SWIFT network
Impact
- Oil Revenue Collapse: Oil exports dropped from 2.5 million bpd in 2017 to under 500,000 bpd in 2019.
- Currency Crisis: The Iranian rial lost over 80% of its value from 2018–2022.
- Nuclear Escalation: In response, Iran resumed uranium enrichment beyond JCPOA limits.
Evaluation
- Strategic Failure: The campaign increased economic pressure but failed to achieve regime change or policy shift. Iran deepened ties with China and Russia, blunting the intended isolation.
Case Study 3: North Korea – Sanctions in a Closed Regime
Background
North Korea has faced UN sanctions since 2006 over its nuclear weapons program. These include:
- Arms embargo
- Ban on exports of coal, textiles, seafood
- Asset freezes on government entities and officials
- Financial transaction restrictions
Impact
- GDP Contraction: The economy shrank by nearly 8.5% between 2017 and 2020.
- Humanitarian Deterioration: Sanctions contributed to chronic food shortages and medical supply gaps, though humanitarian aid remains exempt on paper.
- Continued Missile Tests: Despite pressure, North Korea continues to test ballistic missiles, including intercontinental variants.
Evaluation
- Limited Effectiveness: Sanctions have isolated the regime economically but failed to deter nuclear development or bring Pyongyang to the negotiating table on verifiable disarmament.
Case Study 4: Myanmar – Targeted Sanctions Amid Coup Fallout
Background
Following the February 2021 military coup, the U.S., UK, EU, and others imposed sanctions on military leaders, state-owned enterprises, and financial institutions. Key sectors targeted included jade, timber, and oil and gas.
Impact
- State Revenue Loss: Sanctions on Myanma Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE) restricted a key foreign exchange source for the junta.
- Increased Informal Economy: The black market for jade and rare earth exports expanded, reducing transparency.
- Limited Political Change: The junta tightened control despite sanctions, with over 20,000 political prisoners still detained.
Evaluation
- Mixed Results: Sanctions curtailed regime financing in select sectors but failed to shift power dynamics. Lack of a multilateral enforcement mechanism diluted their impact.
Case Study 5: South Africa – A Sanctions Success Story?
Background
During the 1980s, a global coalition imposed trade, investment, cultural, and sporting sanctions on apartheid South Africa. Key sanctions included:
- U.S. Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act (1986)
- UN arms embargo (1977)
- Disinvestment campaigns by major institutions
Impact
- Capital Flight: Foreign investment dropped sharply as institutional investors divested from South African assets.
- Business Pressure: Multinational firms exited or suspended operations, pressuring the apartheid regime economically and socially.
- Policy Shift: Sanctions helped bring the National Party to the negotiating table. Apartheid officially ended in 1994.
Evaluation
- High Effectiveness: A rare case where multilateral sanctions, internal resistance, and global moral pressure combined to drive systemic political change.
Lessons from the Field: What These Cases Reveal
1. Multilateralism Matters
Sanctions are more impactful when implemented by a broad coalition. The South Africa case succeeded due to global unity, whereas unilateral measures (e.g., U.S. on Iran) often lack enforcement consistency.
2. Economic Leverage Is Not Absolute
Sanctions can erode economic stability but do not guarantee political compliance. High-resilience targets with authoritarian governance structures often absorb the impact without conceding.
3. Clear Objectives and Exit Strategies Are Crucial
Vague goals or indefinite timelines reduce credibility. Sanctions should define conditions for relief to encourage behavioral change and diplomatic engagement.
4. Humanitarian Safeguards Must Be Enforced
Although most regimes exempt food and medical supplies, enforcement gaps can result in harm to civilian populations, undermining legal and moral legitimacy.
5. Adaptation by Targets Is Common
Sanctioned states often build parallel financial systems, diversify trade, or resort to illicit networks. This underlines the need for constant reassessment and technical innovation in sanctions design.
Part C: Navigating Sanctions in Practice — Compliance, Risk, and Strategic Response
Introduction
Sanctions compliance has become a core requirement for international businesses, financial institutions, humanitarian organizations, and even academic institutions. In an environment where violations can result in multimillion-dollar fines, reputational damage, and criminal liability, understanding how to navigate the operational risks of sanctions is no longer optional—it is essential. Part C focuses on how stakeholders can build effective sanctions compliance programs, leverage technology for risk mitigation, and adapt to the shifting global enforcement landscape.
Building an Effective Sanctions Compliance Program
A robust sanctions compliance program (SCP) is a formalized structure that ensures adherence to applicable laws and regulations in jurisdictions where a company operates.
1. Governance and Internal Controls
- Appoint a Sanctions Officer: Large firms should have a designated sanctions compliance officer reporting to executive leadership.
- Board Oversight: Boards must actively monitor and approve sanctions-related risk policies.
- Documentation: Maintain clear records of all compliance procedures, decisions, and screening results.
U.S. Treasury Guidance: OFAC recommends that all SCPs include five essential components:
- Management commitment
- Risk assessment
- Internal controls
- Testing and auditing
- Training
2. Risk Assessment and Jurisdictional Analysis
- Identify Exposure Points: Assess countries, counterparties, subsidiaries, and suppliers for potential risk.
- Evaluate Product/Service Risks: Dual-use goods, financial services, and logistics are frequently scrutinized.
- Consider Secondary Exposure: Determine if counterparties are indirectly dealing with sanctioned parties.
3. Transaction and Counterparty Screening
- Use automated screening systems to check names against:
- OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) list
- EU Consolidated Financial Sanctions list
- UN Sanctions List
- UK OFSI Sanctions List
- Employ fuzzy logic to detect name variants and aliases.
- Screen both the originating and beneficiary parties in any transaction.
Best Practice: Conduct screening during onboarding and at regular intervals, especially after major geopolitical changes or regulatory updates.
Sector-Specific Considerations
1. Financial Institutions
Banks face the most complex compliance obligations due to their role in global fund transfers. Key requirements include:
- SWIFT Message Scrutiny: Ensure all outgoing and incoming messages are screened.
- Blocking and Rejecting Transactions: U.S. banks must block (freeze) assets of SDNs; EU banks often reject non-compliant transactions instead.
- Report Suspicious Activity: Mandatory reporting to regulators is required within strict timelines.
Example: BNP Paribas paid $8.9 billion in penalties in 2014 for facilitating transactions involving Sudan, Cuba, and Iran.
2. Logistics and Maritime Sector
- AIS Spoofing and Ship-to-Ship Transfers: Sanctioned vessels often turn off tracking systems or engage in covert cargo transfers.
- Port Restrictions: Ships linked to sanctioned entities are banned from several ports, including those in the EU, U.S., and Japan.
Response:
- Use satellite data and maritime analytics to detect evasive shipping behavior.
- Partner with vendors offering real-time compliance alerts.
3. Humanitarian and Nonprofit Organizations
- Challenge: Humanitarian actors often operate in sanctioned territories and risk violating sanctions laws even when providing essential aid.
- Licensing Mechanisms: Most sanctions regimes include general or specific licenses for humanitarian exemptions.
- Due Diligence: NGOs must vet local partners and confirm that aid is not diverted to sanctioned entities.
Example: In Syria, aid agencies must ensure they do not work with the Assad regime or blacklisted militia groups.
Role of Technology in Sanctions Compliance
1. Screening Software and Artificial Intelligence
Modern compliance platforms integrate machine learning to reduce false positives and improve match accuracy. Examples include:
- World-Check
- LexisNexis Bridger Insight
- Dow Jones Risk & Compliance
2. Blockchain Analysis
Used to detect illicit crypto transfers tied to sanctioned actors. Firms like Chainalysis and TRM Labs monitor wallets linked to North Korea and Iran.
Example: In 2022, OFAC sanctioned the crypto mixer Tornado Cash, alleging it was used to launder over $455 million by North Korean hacking group Lazarus.
3. Maritime Tracking Tools
- Windward and MarineTraffic offer sanctions compliance modules that identify red-flag behaviors like port hopping, signal gaps, and dark activity.
Global Divergence in Sanctions Policy
With increasing multipolarity, sanctions regimes are no longer uniformly applied. Key divergences include:
1. United States vs. European Union
- The U.S. applies extraterritorial sanctions, enforcing them even on non-U.S. persons dealing in U.S. dollars.
- The EU avoids extraterritorial application and focuses on proportional, legally defendable measures.
2. BRICS Bloc Response
- Russia, China, and Iran are developing alternative financial systems to bypass Western sanctions.
- Mechanisms include bilateral trade in local currencies and new payment systems like CIPS (China) and SPFS (Russia).
Impact: Global firms must now account for jurisdictional conflict—what is legal under Chinese law may violate U.S. regulations.
Recommendations for Stakeholders
For Corporations
- Invest in ongoing training for legal and compliance teams.
- Monitor geopolitical developments daily.
- Avoid overcompliance, which can lead to unnecessary market exit or humanitarian disruption.
For Financial Institutions
- Establish escalation protocols for red-flag transactions.
- Document compliance efforts meticulously to defend against enforcement actions.
- Maintain strong coordination between sanctions, AML, and cybersecurity teams.
For NGOs and Humanitarian Actors
- Work closely with regulators to obtain licenses and clarifications.
- Engage third-party legal reviews for operations in high-risk jurisdictions.
- Advocate for clear, enforceable humanitarian exemptions.
Looking Ahead: Trends Shaping the Future of Sanctions
- Increased Use of Secondary Sanctions
The U.S. is likely to expand pressure on third-country actors involved with Iran, Russia, and North Korea. - Sanctions Targeting Technology and Data
Restrictions now extend to AI chips, semiconductors, drone parts, and cybersecurity tools. - More Autonomous Sanctions Regimes
Post-Brexit UK and rising BRICS assertiveness are fragmenting the sanctions enforcement landscape. - Push for Multilateral Alignment
The G7 and EU aim to harmonize sanctions enforcement to prevent arbitrage. - Demand for Compliance Transparency
Investors and regulators are asking companies to disclose sanctions compliance practices in ESG reports and financial statements.
Conclusion: Why Sanctions Are Central to Modern Geopolitics
Sanctions have become one of the most widely used instruments of statecraft, influencing global power balances, trade alliances, and diplomatic negotiations. Understanding their structure, enforcement, and impact is essential for anyone engaged in geopolitics.
Whether used to pressure adversaries, enforce international norms, or reshape global alliances, sanctions now sit at the heart of foreign policy strategy. Misunderstanding their implications can lead to strategic miscalculations. In contrast, clear insight into sanctions dynamics enables more effective policy design, international coordination, and risk assessment.
In an era defined by geopolitical competition and fragmented alliances, decoding sanctions is vital to understanding and shaping global power.
About The Author
Good insight.