Dober članek v Washington Postu o ameriškem “civiliziranem” načinu vsiljevanja svoje volje drugim državam. ZDA sankcionirajo tretjino držav na svetu, pri čemer je največ sankcij – merjeno s številom sankcionoranih subjekotv – uvedla administracija Joeja Bidna. Problem sankcij je … da ne delujejo. Oziroma delujejo na perverzen način. Če je namen sankcij, da “spametujejo” voditelje držav oziroma jih prisilijo, da se uklonijo ameriški volji ali odstopijo, potem sankcije ne delujejo. Kajti od Kube naprej (Severna Koreja, Iran, Sirija, Rusija itd.) ZDA s sankcijami niso uspele zamenjati režimov sankcioniranih držav. So pa sankcije povzročile humanitarne katastrofe v številnih državah zaradi zmanjšanega dostopa do hrane, zdravil in drugih kritičnih dobrin, zato jih OZN v splošnem ne priporoča. Običajno ameriški politiki poudarjajo, da bi humanitarne katastrofe lahko povzročile družbene nerede, prek katerih bi lahko prišlo do zamenjav režimov. Vendar se to do sedaj v 60 letih še ni zgodilo.

Resnici na ljubo so ZDA bistveno bolj uspešne pri zamenjavi režimov, ko se prek svojih ambasad vmešavajo v volitve drugih držav ali inicirajo družbene nerede prek nevladnih organizacij, ki jih sponzorirajo (arabska pomlad, Majdan v Ukrajini itd.). Najbrž poznate tisti vic:

“Zakaj v ZDA ne pride do revolucije?”

“Ker tam ni ameriške ambasade”.

Zakaj torej ameriške administracije tako rade uporabljajo sankcije v politične namene? Odgovor je perverzen: Ker je to bolje od tega, kot da ne naredijo nič ali da vojaško posredujejo.  No, so pa sankcije dober, milijardni biznis za lobiste v Washingtonu, podkupljive politike in množico prekupčevalcev, kot kaže članek v WaPo.

Res civiliziran globalni hegemon, ki ima občutek, da se mora vpletati v zadeve vsake države na tem svetu, da bi se ta obnašala po volji ZDA.

Zakaj torej ZDA ne sankcionirajo Izraela zaradi genocida v Gazi? Ker je Izrael izpostava ameriške politike na Bližnjem vzhodu in namesto ZDA počne to, kar bi sicer “morale” ZDA, da bi kontrolirale nafto. Grozovito.

Today, the United States imposes three times as many sanctions as any other country or international body, targeting a third of all nations with some kind of financial penalty on people, properties or organizations. They have become an almost reflexive weapon in perpetual economic warfare, and their overuse is recognized at the highest levels of government. But American presidents find the tool increasingly irresistible.

By cutting their targets off from the Western financial system, sanctions can crush national industries, erase personal fortunes and upset the balance of political power in troublesome regimes — all without putting a single American soldier in harm’s way.

But even as sanctions have proliferated, concern about their impact has grown.

In Washington, the swell of sanctions has spawned a multibillion-dollar industry. Foreign governments and multinational corporations spend exorbitant sums to influence the system, while white-shoe law firms and K Street lobbying shops have built booming sanctions practices — in part by luring government officials to cash in on their expertise.

Elsewhere, sanctions have pushed autocratic regimes into black market trade, empowering criminal networks and gangs of smugglers. U.S. adversaries are ramping up their efforts to work together to circumvent the financial penalties. And like military action, economic warfare can leave collateral damage: Sanctions on Venezuela, for instance, contributed to an economic contraction roughly three times as large as that caused by the Great Depression in the United States.

Sanctions — or even just the threat of them — can be an effective policy tool, a way to punish bad behavior or pressure an adversary without resorting to military force. Sanctions have allowed U.S. governments to take moral, economically meaningful stands against perpetrators of war crimes. They helped bring an end to South Africa’s apartheid regime and contributed to the eventual overthrow of Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic. Even when they fail, proponents say, they can be preferable to the alternative, which might be doing nothing — or going to war.

Still, North Korea has been sanctioned for more than a half-century without halting Pyongyang’s efforts to acquire nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles. U.S. sanctions on Nicaragua have done little to deter the authoritarian regime of President Daniel Ortega. Two years of sanctions on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine have degraded Moscow’s long-term economic prospects and raised the costs of military production. But these sanctions have also spawned a “dark fleet” of ships selling oil outside international regulations, while bringing the Kremlin into closer alliance with Beijing.

Vir: Washington Post