tonight with a biden administra
seeking new sanctions from the U.N. Against North Korea
sanctions earlier by the U.S. Against a handful of
North korean officials came after North Korea claimed
it had conducted yet another ballistic missile test
Sanctions on that regime go back to 2006. But whether
they've had an impact is unclear tonight. We look at
the role of sanctions play in foreign policy and why
they're important Alex miller reports from the United
Nations. The United States has today imposed additional
sanctions. We are imposing sanctions on specific
individuals. Powerful sanctions will go into full
effect. I've also signed an executive order authorizing
new measures including sanction World leaders love to
talk sanctions. But what our sanctions, how do they
work And are they effective The Council on Foreig
Relations calls them a favorite tool for governments t
respond to foreign policy challenges. They can include
travel bans, asset freezes, arms embargoes and trade
restrictions And they can target a country's government
or specific individuals in the case of Cuba the US has
imposed sanctions against the island since the 1960s,
including trade restrictions an limits on travel. Mm
hmm. After a government crackdown against pr
last year, the biden administration added new sancti
targeting Cuban officials, but countries aren't the
only ones that can hand out sanctions. Bodies like the
european union and the United Nations used them too.
The U.N. has established 30 sanctioned regimes since
1966. The organization's Security Council, including
the U.S. Votes on sanctions resolutions. There is
objection. It's so decided. Let's look at North Korea.
The U.N. first passed sanctions against it in 2006,
following the country's first nuclear test, the U.N.
originally focused on North Korea's military, but it's
since expanded to include general financial sanct
While countries and bodies may be quick to impose
sanctions, it's tough to say how effective they are.
There's a feel good element to sanctions and in that
sense, they nearly always work, but there's a do good
aspect and that's what we studied. They do good in
terms of changing the policies of the target governme
About 1/3 of the time. So yes, that's not bad for
diplomacy, but it's certainly not 100%. The United
Nations acknowledges sanctions work on their own
and work best when coupled with a larger conflict
management strategy. But proponents of sanctions say
they're better than alternative options when we're
dealing with the threat of nuclear proliferation and
support for terrorism. We don't have a choice between
good and bad options. We have a choice between bad and
worse options. And I think war is the worst option.
Sanctions give us a peaceful alternative. Experts s
sanctions can continue to work if used strategically,
but if they're imposed carelessly they'll lose their
power. And today Vic you mentioned the potential U.N
Sanctions against North Korea. Remember though that
would have to be approved by the Security Council which
meets at U.N. Headquarters right behind me. Now both
Russia and China are permanent members of the counci
which means they get veto power. And both countries
have recently asked to lift sanctions against North
Korea. Trierfic. That was our Alex Miller reporting.
Joining us now is MAx Bergman a senior fellow at
american Progress. He worked at the State Department
and as a speechwriter for Secretary of State john Kerry,
Thanks for coming on. The Y x.ma Thanks so much for
having me. So we see countries like the US and
governing bodies like the United Nations imposed a lot
of sanctions. Do we know how effective they really are
Well, I think it depends. And I think you're the
presentation leading up was was really good but I think
there's also the fact that there has to be costs on
countries that take certain actions that go against
international law that go that violate the U.N. Charter.
And so some of this is not simply sort of solving
problems but about making sure that there are costs to
certain countries taking certain actions. And the
reason why you want to have costs is because you don't
want other countries to follow to take some more action.
So I think North Korea is one example. On the one hand
sanctions haven't resulted in North korean getting rid
of its nuclear weapons but it does provide a deterrent
to other countries who don't want to be like North
Korea e impoverished. So North Korea has nuclear
weapons but its impoverished. So if sanctions worked in
that case, I think you could argue yes and no they
haven't gotten rid of uh North Korea's nuclear weapon
but but other countries don't want to be like North
Korea. And so when we have a situation like Russia
potentially invading Ukraine, i there are no costs to
a bigger country invading a smaller country, the danger
is that other countries will sort of follow suit will
say okay we can take similar action and not have any
punishments come against us. So opponents might argue
that sanctions are a tool for rich and powerful
countries to keep other countries in check in your
opinion. Is there a truth to that argument Yeah there
definitely is a bit of truth to that. And and in this
case part of the reason why the United States
constantly is reverting the sanctions is because the
global financial system relies on the U.S. Dollar and
relies on access to U.S. Banks in the U.S. Financial
markets. And that gives the United States tremendous
power to freeze out individuals companies and count
uh and and it gives us a lot of leverage to kind of uh
sometimes enforce international but also to enforce
uh and have enforce us foreign policy and create real
costs in countries when they go against the wishes of
the United States. And so that' not a tool that a lot
of countries have. It's it's a tool of the powerful. Um
And so it's important that the United States use
sanctions wisely and not use them as indiscriminately
as it sometimes has in the past. Well, let me ask you
this realistically, then could a poor country impose
effective sanctions against a richer nation that it
felt was doing something wrong Well indeed, you know,
Russia for instance, after the US and European Union
invoked sanctions against it in 2014 responded with its
own sanctions, but you know, no one really really cared
about that. It didn't have a tremendous impact on the
global financial system is Russia's economy. is not
very large. And so if you say that U.S. Businesses ca
do business in Russia, well that doesn't have a huge
impact on them. But if the United States says you can'
do business with the United States, the largest econ
in the world that has a tremendous impact. And so thi
is where the size of one's economy really matters. T
the size of the country's financial system, the role of
its currency. Uh huh. I'll play a critical role uh in
in in how sanctions are are levied and implemented.
Let's talk a little bit about the people who live in
countries that are sanctioned. Sometimes it can cause
unintentional hardship, right for innocent people. How
do you effectively target a country's leadership or
government without hurting the people who are living
there Great question. And I think this is one of the
biggest challenges for sanction when you have a
country like cuba the United States is essentially, y
know, set sanctions and then sort of forgotten about
them with tremendous costs on the Cuban people and also
not advancing us interests where the Cuban government
can point to sanctions for instance and say the reason
why we're poor, the reason why our economy isn't
working is because uh the United States is treating us
badly, uh that said, I think it's really incumbent upo
the United States to figure out and think about how it
can use sanctions in a more effective manner. And so
when we have a country like Russia where the oligarch
class, the rich and powerful and Russia have all
planted their money, invested their money abroad in
cities like London Miami and new york they're very
exposed. And so one of the things that you can do with
sanctions is target the financial backers of a regime,
whether that's in Russia, whether it's Venezuela, uh,
that have their money in in the western financial
system, and that's highly exposed, and something that I
think the United States is going to really look at in
the case of Russia, I want to bring up a Washington
Post op ed that you wrote from 2020, you criticized
former President Trump's use of sanctions to punish
Russian individuals linked to election interference.
You wrote in part that, quote, the simple fact is that
even harsh looking sanctions have little impact when
there's zero political will to enforce them. So there's
imposing sanctions, right And then there's enforcing
sanctions. How often does one happen without the other
Right. So, you know, this is part of I think the
problem when it comes to the debate about sanctions,
That you Congress passed a really tough sanctions bill
in 2017, which gave the Trump administration, uh, t
executive branch, the authority to implement sanction
It didn't say it had to. And then the question is that
what is the trump administratio going to do And the
fact is it did very little to implement the law, uh, it
it didn't take target sanctions against Russia's old
guard class. It's rich and powerful. It was very
limited in the sanctions that it took against Russia's
against countries and companies that we're dealing with
ssRuia's defense, industrial complex, its arms industry.
And so, you know, there has to be a degree of
discretion given to an administration because somet
when the U.S. Does sanctions, it could it could
boomerang back, like if the United States did sanctions
sanctions against the Russian energy industry that
could hurt the Europeans who are dependent on Russian
gas. So you have to be smart about how you go about
this. But the administration has not then the trump
administration nor the by administration is very
interested in doing a really tough and aggressive
sanctions against Russia requir sort of a little bit
of a whack a mole process where you implement san
companies change their stripes, they change their
owners, You then have to do another round of that. And
that I think is what we'll start to see if Russia
invades Ukraine a much more concerted effort, much mor
aggressive effort to implement sanctions into sort of
begin to decouple the western economies from Russia
Will you bring me to my next point, your expertise i
in europe and Russia, in your view, What is the success
that we're having with sanctions levied against Russia
Is it working Is it not working Where are we with that
So the sanctions that were done in 2014 had a real
impact on the Russian economy, uh Russia's GDP, but has
I think, on average declined around 1.5% per year due
to sanctions. Now it's a little tough to tell because
Russia's economy is so dependent on oil prices, that
The moment we did sanctions oil prices in 25 14 also
declined. But what happened is that there was, you know,
a real energy in the first two years of the last two
years of the Obama administration, 2014, and 2016.
then the momentum sat uh and if you don't update
sanctions, the impact of them declines. And so now
sanctions are still in place, but they haven't had a
really significant impact on the Russian economy in the
years since. So I think the impact has been that the
Russians are nervous about sanctions. They are
Preparing themselves for being sanctioned should they
invade, but they also expect the sanctions storm to
pass. And I think the key question is not necessarily
the US and European response in 2022 if Russia invaded
Ukraine. But what's the response in 2023, And basically
throughout this decade, do we take strong steps to have
real economic costs on on the Kremlin for eggs actions
Okay, max Bergman, really informative conversation
thank you for coming on. The y thanks so much for
having me coming up next year, we'll get a better