Comments on: Sanctions http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/146 Ian Lance Taylor Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:45:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.2 Comment on Sanctions by: Ian Lance Taylor http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/146#comment-10643 Tue, 19 Feb 2008 03:20:23 +0000 http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/146#comment-10643 fche: there are indeed sanctions on North Korea: http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/programs/ascii/nkorea.txt http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8853.doc.htm I do feel that once you are selling things in a country, the government's attempt to control purchaes become significantly less effective. For example, consider the way Iran's government has had a very hard time controlling the sale of satellite dishes. fche: there are indeed sanctions on North Korea:

http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/programs/ascii/nkorea.txt

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8853.doc.htm

I do feel that once you are selling things in a country, the government’s attempt to control purchaes become significantly less effective. For example, consider the way Iran’s government has had a very hard time controlling the sale of satellite dishes.

]]> Comment on Sanctions by: Ian Lance Taylor http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/146#comment-10642 Tue, 19 Feb 2008 03:13:24 +0000 http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/146#comment-10642 jldugger: Thanks for the note and the quote. It's a good point that Iraq suffers from the curse of oil. I think we still need to look for an effective way to respond. jldugger: Thanks for the note and the quote. It’s a good point that Iraq suffers from the curse of oil. I think we still need to look for an effective way to respond.

]]> Comment on Sanctions by: fche http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/146#comment-10523 Sun, 17 Feb 2008 00:20:31 +0000 http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/146#comment-10523 I didn't know there is a trade embargo type thing active against North Korea. Are you sure? In any case, I'm of the impression that even if the products were suddenly permissible to sell (as far as the US was concerned), essentially none would be permissible to buy (as far as the weird NK regime is concerned). I didn’t know there is a trade embargo type thing active against North Korea. Are you sure? In any case, I’m of the impression that even if the products were suddenly permissible to sell (as far as the US was concerned), essentially none would be permissible to buy (as far as the weird NK regime is concerned).

]]> Comment on Sanctions by: jldugger http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/146#comment-10513 Sat, 16 Feb 2008 21:48:10 +0000 http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/146#comment-10513 "experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed" The Iraqi sanctions did have a humane trade provision, but it quickly became corrupt. The quote above suggests that expecting the people to rise against their government is a bad idea, so long as the expected alternative is worse. Mostly what this suggests is that the compromise was bound to fail -- if Saddam's government was backed by the people, the provisions make the embargo sufferable and undermine the purpose. If Saddam's government could prevail in the face of sanctions, then they have no purpose aside from giving regulators an incredible power to skim profits from the regulated trade. As an extra note, the ban on dual use goods, one you might support, may have prevented the repair of water purification and medical systems destroyed in the first Gulf War. I think expecting the people to rise against their government and form "a more perfect union" is silly. Saddam came to power not through democratic means, but by replacing the previously installed dictator. And he preserved his power the same way he acquired it, with brutal violence. Ultimately, there isn't much "we" can do about it, as long as the people with money seek domination over the country's main trade good. Perhaps this is the curse of oil? “experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed”

The Iraqi sanctions did have a humane trade provision, but it quickly became corrupt. The quote above suggests that expecting the people to rise against their government is a bad idea, so long as the expected alternative is worse. Mostly what this suggests is that the compromise was bound to fail — if Saddam’s government was backed by the people, the provisions make the embargo sufferable and undermine the purpose. If Saddam’s government could prevail in the face of sanctions, then they have no purpose aside from giving regulators an incredible power to skim profits from the regulated trade. As an extra note, the ban on dual use goods, one you might support, may have prevented the repair of water purification and medical systems destroyed in the first Gulf War.

I think expecting the people to rise against their government and form “a more perfect union” is silly. Saddam came to power not through democratic means, but by replacing the previously installed dictator. And he preserved his power the same way he acquired it, with brutal violence. Ultimately, there isn’t much “we” can do about it, as long as the people with money seek domination over the country’s main trade good. Perhaps this is the curse of oil?

]]>