http://www.asriran.com/fa/news/103903/10928-روز-از-محاصره-اقتصادی-ایران-گذشت

Here are comments by George Perkovich on this regard from the transcripts

“Ideally, sanctions would change behavior. But in the case of Iran, they’re not. But there’s another reason to sanction states, which is to punish them. And it may not change your behavior; but there is a cost for this action. And in part, we want to communicate to other states, potential other actors who may be looking at what you’re doing as a model – maybe contemplating acquiring fuel cycle capabilities, hedging their bets, doing other things and looking at Iran and saying, well, you can get away with it. The price isn’t very high. The risk is relatively low, so let’s do it. And for that reason, you could do sanctions to punish, even though you don’t have an expectation that there is going to be regime change. And I think we need to deconflate those arguments.”

“last point I would say is that we really need to think long term, because I don’t think there’s a short-term solution to any problem in Iran. And so, the long term, it seems to me, is mostly to contain the damage of what Iran might be doing. That’s not just contain Iran, but also to be thinking about steps that we can take or that internationally can be taken to make it harder for other states to follow in Iran’s footsteps. And those can be both kind of restrictive things on nonproliferation but reassurance measures in terms of security. There are other steps, I think, but all with the mindset of containing the potential damage if you can’t change Iran’s behavior.”

Thanks for the correction on the Ledeen transcript. My oversight. The transcripts are extremely useful.

Eric

Eric: There was indeed a transcript made of the Ledeen-Leverett debate. It’s linked from the event page directly below the program description and directly above the video.

http://acus.org/event/iran-engagement-or-regime-change

Thanks again.

Thanks very much for taking the time to make this translation. Very interesting. I hope you’ll do it again if you come upon another interesting article like this one.

Flynt made a good point about the secondary sanction:

“The biggest new contracts for investments in the Iranian upstream, the development of Iranian hydrocarbons right now, are coming from the Chinese and from other non-Western companies.And if you want to talk about a policy that is detached from reality, what do you think the odds are that the United States is going to impose secondary sanctions on a Chinese energy company for doing business in Iran right now?”
It is a joke.

Flynt also raised a few other good points:

“If we want to project large amounts of conventional military power into the Persian Gulf or anywhere else, we’re going to have to do it on borrowed money. We won’t be paying for it ourselves. We will be relying on Chinese, Saudis, and other major creditors of the United States to loan us the money to do it.

Our Iran policy, especially the sanctions part of that policy, is designed for some other planet than the one I just described, a planet in which the United States is this uniquely hegemonic power and can, through largely unilateral actions and initiatives, shape the world and shape in a determinative way the strategic choices that other countries make. That world may indeed have existed for a while in the 1990s. I would contend it doesn’t exist today. Our Iran policy is increasingly at odds with the reality of the world we live in today”

10928 Days of Economic Sanctions on Iran

by Syed Javad Syedpor

Asre Iran; Sydjvad Sydpvr –Today once again President Obama signed and renewed the Iran Sanctions Act for one additional year. Every time that the topic of Iran sanctions is raised, we ask our self a very pointed question, when was that we were not sanctioned?

More than eleven thousand days have elapsed since the Iran’s revolution of Feb 11 1979. During this period, the only time Iran was not under US sanctions is just less than a year time; the time between the revolution’s day in Feb 11 1979 and the occupation of the spy nest (US Embassy in Tehran) on Nov. 4 1979. Since then the sanctions on Iran is been continually expanded.
.
In other words, the Iranian nation is been under sanctions by the US and its like-minded allies for 10 thousand and 928 days. One can count this calendar for every 24 hours as a full day.

However, political realism or rationalism tells us, if in 10 thousand and 928 days this policy continually did not produce the intended results, the evidence is this policy’s failure that the United States and its western allies would not comprehend or accept.

In other words, and without any intention to hide, if these sanctions caused some suffering for the Iranians, at the same time they did not also produce the intended results for the installers of these said sanctions.

The calendar of U.S. sanctions against Iran can be measure in six general periods
First- The spy nest occupation (US Embassy) period (from 1979 to 1981)
Second – The sacred defense (Iran – Iraq War) Period (from 1981 to 1988)
Third – The reconstruction period (from 1989 to 1992)
Fourth – The Clinton era of and dual containment (from 1993 to 2001)
Fifth – After the event of September 11, 2001
Sixth – Started the of Security Council resolutions since 2006.

During these periods, sanctions although were introduced and applied in different forms and shapes they did not produce their intended goals of overthrowing the regime and or to give up its nuclear program.

From the Second World War until now, especially after decades of 70’s sanctions success has continually decreased, this issue has been more evident in current times.

Between World War I until 1990,for nearly 75 years a total of 115 economic sanctions were placed and carried out against different countries, which is equivalent to an average of 1.5 sanctions per year.

However, since 1990 the number of economic sanctions has increasingly intensified. For example, between 1990 and 1999, 66 countries experienced economic sanctions. In other words, the average annual number of sanctions has increased nearly five times from 1.5 sanctions per year for the period of 1918 to 1999 to 6.6 sanctions per year for the 1990 to1999 respectively.

In fact, in the contemporary word one of the reasons for reduction in success of sanctions is due to this increased number of sanctions. Because when sanctions range becomes extensive and covers many countries, appropriate structures against the sanctions will form whiten the formal and informal international economy.

Many experts believe with the downfall of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war and the rise of a single polar world lead by the United States as the main reason for this incredible increase in the sanction regimes. Because the U.S. government has always considered a greater, share in the placement of economic sanction policies. From 1918 to 1990, the US government is responsible for 77 of 115 total sanction regimes in the world that is 67% of total sanctions placed during that period; however, their share of the responsibility for sanctions increases to 92% for the period of 1990 to 1999.

Just only during the first term of the of President Clinton, 61 U.S. government economic sanctions were implemented against 35 countries with the population of over 2.3 billion people, meaning about 42 percent of the whole world population was under US sanctions.

During the past 30 years, some of the sanctions implemented by United States were against Iran. From Nov.14 1979, which is 10 days after the occupation of the spy nest (US Embassy), Jimmy Carter’s presidential directive 12170 ordered the blockade of $12 billion of Iranian nation’s assets. Few months later in April 1980, Carter ordered prohibition of all trade and travels to Iran. In March 15 1995 during the Clinton administration, the National Emergency Act of March 15 1995 passed which increased the range of the sanctions. In last 30 years, this process has continued with 34 similar enactments

No doubt during this past 30 years the U.S. government has done all it could do against Iran, and if it was possible to do more they had it done by now.

Now besides extending the National Emergency act for one more year, they also are trying for a new round of sanctions at the UN Security Council. Considering, what happened during the past 30 years, this will be the “seventh period” of sanctions perhaps with newer approaches, and more pressure imposed on Iran. However, if the sanctions in the past three decades in these six past periods have not produced the results for US and its allies what makes them hope this time will.