Sanctions as a Solution: A Familiar Spectacle
What the byline won't tell you: A Consistent Playbook of Symbolic Pressure The current UK sanctions targeting Sudanese military and Rapid Support Forces (RSF) leaders, announced in late 2024, are framed as a response to the devastating conflict and humanitarian crisis. This narrative of imposing financial penalties on those deemed responsible for atrocities is not new; it is a recurring feature of
Western foreign policy. A closer look reveals a pattern of deploying such measures with predictable outcomes. 1. FIRST INSTANCE: The Rhodesia Sanctions (1965) When Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) declared unilateral independence in 1965 to maintain white minority rule, the international community, including the UK, imposed extensive economic sanctions. This was one of the earliest and most comprehensive
sanction regimes of the modern era, covering trade, finance, and oil (Rhodesia did not have local oil reserves). The aim was swift collapse of the Smith regime. 2. REPETITIONS: South Africa and the Apartheid Regime (1980s) & Cuba Embargo (Ongoing since 1960s) South Africa: Throughout the 1980s, the US, UK, and others imposed various sanctions against the apartheid regime. While often cited as
instrumental in its downfall, many analysts argue the primary drivers were internal resistance, demographic shifts, and the end of the Cold War reducing the geopolitical utility of the regime (University of Johannesburg, 2013). The sanctions were leaky and often circumvented. Cuba: The US embargo against Cuba, initiated in 1960, remains one of the longest-standing and most comprehensive sanction