Will Crushing Sanctions Lead to the Overthrow of the Islamic Republic?

Disputed premise: Consider this descriptive-explanatory claim: "Crushing or paralyzing sanctions will lead to the overthrow of a dictatorial regime." Is this claim true? In other words, do historical evidence and indicators refute or support this claim? Some individuals and groups who believe this claim to be true advocate for sanctions against Iran in order to bring about the downfall of the Islamic Republic. Thus, the descriptive-explanatory claim transforms into a prescriptive recommendation: "Sanction Iran so that the Islamic Republic falls." Proponents and defenders acknowledge the harsh consequences of crushing sanctions. For instance, after the pro-Russian government in Ukraine was overthrown and Crimea was annexed by Putin, Russia faced some economic sanctions from the US and Europe. These limited sanctions also had effects on the Russian economy. According to the World Bank, Russia's economic growth from 2011 to 2017 was 5.3, 3.6, 1.8, 0.7, -2.8, -0.2, and 1.5 percent respectively. If sanctions had no effect, they would not have been defended or prescribed. The Trump administration adopted the most severe crippling sanctions based on this perspective. Rudy Giuliani, lawyer and advisor to Donald Trump, stated on June 30, 2018: "We are the most powerful economy in the world... and if we sanction you (Iran), you will be overthrown." Donald Trump said on July 16, 2018, that protests and unrest in Iran "started when I tore up the [nuclear] deal." "This is not good for us or the world, but they have rioted in all their cities. Inflation is rampant and nearing its peak. Not that you want to harm anyone, but the regime [of Iran] does not allow the people to know that we are 100 percent behind them." Protests and demonstrations have occurred in Iran, which are "likely broader than any time they have had before." The experience of sanctions and the refutation of the claim of regime overthrow: If the descriptive-explanatory claim "crippling sanctions = regime overthrow" is a general law, this general rule can only be refuted by a single counter-evidence (since induction and experience never lead to a general law, but counter-evidence can refute general claims). It is unlikely that anyone would claim this is a general law. If this claim is only based on a few cases of countries that have faced crippling sanctions, it must be assessed whether those limited cases (North Korea, Cuba, Iraq, Libya, Venezuela, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Burma, Yugoslavia, etc.) led to the overthrow of the ruling regimes or not? The answer is clear; none of the dictatorial political regimes have been overthrown due to crippling sanctions. The communist regime of North Korea has lasted seven decades. Kim Il-sung's government lasted from 1948 to 1994, his son Kim Jong-il from 1994 to 2012, and since then, his grandson Kim Jong-un has been the leader. The socialist regime of Cuba has also survived for 58 years under the leadership of Fidel Castro and his brother Raul Castro against unilateral American sanctions. Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath regime also stood firm against crippling sanctions until its end, and those sanctions did not lead to the regime's fall. The sanctions on Sudan, imposed by the US Congress in 1993, not only did not lead to the overthrow of General Omar al-Bashir's regime (which came to power through a coup on June 30, 1989), but also the arrest warrant issued against him by the International Criminal Court for war crimes and ethnic cleansing in 2009 was ignored by all governments. Sanctions as collective punishment of a nation's people: If crippling economic sanctions have not led to the overthrow of dictatorial regimes, they have caused immense pain and suffering (hunger, lack of medicine, death) for the people of those countries. Sanctions are collective punishment of a nation's people. Consider the following examples: First) Iraq: The crippling sanctions on Iraq killed only half a million Iraqi children. When a reporter asked Madeleine Albright, the then US Secretary of State, if this was more than the casualties from the atomic bombing of Hiroshima by the US, and whether it was worth it, she said: Yes, it was worth it. When they destroyed Iraqi society from within with crippling sanctions and the sanctions did not lead to the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, they killed, wounded, and displaced millions of Iraqis with military intervention and spread terrorism in this country and the entire region. Second) Cuba: The unilateral economic sanctions imposed by the US on Cuba began in 1960 and gradually increased. These sanctions deprived countries trading with Cuba of access to US markets. Cuba managed to withstand the sanctions with the help of the Soviet Union, but the sanctions inflicted significant damage on the people of that country. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US further increased economic pressures on Cuba. However, the Chavez regime rushed to help the Castro regime. Third) North Korea: The sanctions on North Korea have caused hundreds of thousands of its people to die of hunger during this period. However, the communist regime of North Korea not only was not overthrown, but during the sanctions, it achieved nuclear bombs and intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons. Doug Bandow in the Huffington Post on June 15, 2017 explained that economic sanctions have starved and impoverished the North Korean people, but only upset the government. Eleanor Albert wrote on January 3, 2018, on the website of the Council on Foreign Relations that five types of unilateral sanctions from the US, EU, Japan, South Korea, and the UN Security Council have been imposed on North Korea. North Korea's economy has been completely excluded from the global economy. Only UN sanctions have reduced North Korea's exports by 90 percent and limited the country's total income to $500 to $800 million per year. The per capita income of North Koreans in 2016 was less than five percent of South Korea's per capita income. Former US President Jimmy Carter wrote about the effects of economic sanctions on people in the Washington Post on December 26, 2014: "In the travels I have made to countries under economic sanctions, I have seen firsthand the ruthless results of these sanctions on the lives of innocent people who know nothing about international disputes and live under dictatorial governments. Sanctions against these regimes are often ineffective... The situation in North Korea is much more tragic than in Cuba. The US began economic sanctions against that country 64 years ago. There is hunger and severe food shortages there. According to UN estimates, each person needs 600 grams of legumes per day, but in North Korea, the amount is 128 grams per day. A Congressional Research Service estimate in 1998 indicated that between 300,000 and 800,000 people in Korea die each year due to hunger. US aid to the North Korean people, which began in the 1990s, was reduced by President George W. Bush and completely cut off by President Obama in 2010... If sanctions are to be imposed on a country, they should be limited to restrictions on the foreign travel of its leaders, their bank accounts, and other special privileges, not economic destruction that sustains the lives of ordinary people." Fourth) Venezuela: Sanctions have destroyed this country's economy: According to the World Bank, Venezuela's economic growth rate in 2014 was -3.894. According to Statista, Venezuela's economic growth in 2015, 2016, and 2017 was -6.2, -16.5, and -12 percent respectively. According to the World Bank, Venezuela's inflation rate from 2008 to 2015 was 31.4, 27, 28.2, 26.1, 21.1, 40.6, 62.2, and 110 percent respectively. The Global Finance website, citing the International Monetary Fund, reported Venezuela's inflation in 2016 and 2017 as 475.8 percent and 1660 percent respectively. According to the IMF's forecast, Venezuela's inflation rate will reach 2300 percent in 2018. The IMF also predicts that Venezuela's unemployment rate will rise to 30 percent in 2018. According to the CIA, Venezuela's external debt as of December 31, 2016, was $109.8 billion. According to Trading Economics, Venezuela's external debt in September 2017 was $244 billion, which dropped to $83 billion in October. Various sources estimate Venezuela's external debt to be between $100 and $150 billion. The UN report on development shows that Venezuela's Gini coefficient averaged 46.9 during the period from 2010 to 2015 (p. 207). The decline of all economic indicators has led to the misery of the people of this country. Foreign Policy wrote on January 12, 2018, in an article that the people of Venezuela, not the political system, will bear the human and economic costs of economic sanctions. These sanctions will turn the current humanitarian crisis in the country into a complete humanitarian disaster. The majority of the people of Venezuela oppose US sanctions. The Brookings Institution wrote in an article on February 12, 2018, that the majority of the people of Venezuela are facing food and medicine crises due to sanctions. The child mortality rate increased by 30 percent in 2016 alone. Three-quarters of the people have lost 20 pounds, and everyone is searching through garbage for food. The refugee crisis to neighboring countries has increased, with four million Venezuelans—over 10 percent of the country's population—seeking better living conditions in neighboring countries. Given the shortage of food and medicine, this number will increase further. Only 750,000 have gone to Colombia, and this could rise to two million. The number of Venezuelan refugees exceeds that of refugees from the Syrian civil war. The crippling sanctions on Iran revealed their consequences quickly. According to the World Bank, Iran's economic growth in 2012 and 2013 was -7.5 and -2 percent respectively. However, in the four years from 2014 to 2017, the average annual economic growth of Iran increased to 5 percent. According to the World Bank, Iran's inflation rate in 2011, 2012, and 2013 was 20.6, 27.3, and 39.3 percent respectively. However, in 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017, it decreased to 17.2, 13.7, 8.6, and 9 percent respectively. The consequences of those sanctions were very heavy for the people. The people of Iran were still suffering from the repercussions of those sanctions when the US withdrew from the nuclear agreement and a new round of sanctions began, forcing the Iranian people to pay a heavy price for them. The dictatorial government of the Islamic Republic has no choice but to circumvent the sanctions. A significant increase in economic corruption—and looters like Babak Zanjani—is one of the consequences of circumventing sanctions. The power of the Revolutionary Guard will also increase in this process. Economic sanctions do not solve the issue of dictatorship; rather, they politically lead to greater isolation, a more closed political space, and a securitized society. Empowering the people and society is a necessary condition for the transition from dictatorship to democracy. Crushing sanctions severely weaken the people and society. The goal of freedom-seekers is to transition Iran from the dictatorship of the Islamic Republic to secular democracy, not to block the path to it. The views expressed in this note do not necessarily reflect the views of Radio Farda. Akbar Ganji, Iranian journalist and researcher.