Iran sanctions: playing the long game

Iran has endured three decades of US sanctions. Have they worked? Yes and no.

This article is part of a special report on the impact of sanctions on Iran's economy. For the main story, go here

Iran has been under one form or another of US sanctions for more than 30 years. After the 1979 Islamic Revolution and the takeover of the US Embassy in Tehran, which saw 52 Americans held hostage in the country for 444 days, the United States seized extensive Iranian assets, the first iteration of financial restrictions that have only expanded in the decades since.

The eventual release of the hostages, on the day Ronald Reagan was sworn in as president, in some ways marked the high point of successful sanctions against Iran. Reagan's predecessor, Jimmy Carter, had promised to release about $8 billion of the seized money in exchange for the hostages' safe return.

In the decades since, one sanction after another has piled up, with a sharp impact on Iran's economy but little to show in the way of intended results. The US Department of the Treasury currently lists 34 executive orders and US laws that limit the financial activities of Iran and those who do business with the country. The latest round of US and international sanctions, passed this year, have gummed up the country's ability to sell crude oil, sending Iran's currency (the rial) to record lows and freezing its banks, including its central banks, from the routine transactions that make global commerce possible.

This may eventually break the country's will to pursue its nuclear enrichment program, which it insists is for peaceful purposes only.

But Iran's traditional response to financial restraints has been defiance, and upping the ante. Consider 1984. When the US Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, were bombed by a Shiite militia in October 1983, killing 241 American soldiers and marines, the Reagan administration determined that Iran had played a role. In response, it added Iran to a list of countries that support terrorism and banned the export to Iran of "dual use" goods – items that could have a military use.

Did Iran end ties with groups the US deems terrorists? Far from it. It became a major adviser and financial supporter of Hezbollah, the Shiite militia that emerged as Lebanon's most potent political movement. And it has become a major financial backer of Hamas, the Palestinian militant group that now governs the Gaza Strip.

In 1992, President Bill Clinton signed the Iran-Iraq Arms Non-Proliferation Act, which promised sanctions for any government or individual who assisted Iran in pursuit of nuclear weapons. That was the first tentative step toward the 10 major rounds of sanctions since.

Yet Iran's nuclear program has still crept forward. Have sanctions "worked?" It depends on how you define success. There have been pe-riods in which Iran granted greater access to inspectors from the United Nations' nuclear watchdog agency. Its nuclear work has certainly been dramatically slowed by sanctions. And war has been avoided.

But if judged against a standard of "has Iran's nuclear work been reversed, or halted," then the answer is no.

Have sanctions worked in other cases? The answer to that is a qualified yes. Saddam Hussein abandoned his nuclear weapons program after Iraq's economy was ruined by the heavy sanctions regime that followed the Gulf War. But he also sought to conceal the extent of his compliance, apparently believing that without ambiguity, his country would be more likely to be invaded. Invaded it was, in 2003 – only after were sanctions lifted.

In Libya, Muammar Qaddafi gave up the scraps of his moribund nuclear program in 2003, as the US geared up for war with Iraq. US and international sanctions were swiftly lifted. Whether Mr. Qaddafi regretted this decision in his final days in 2011, as NATO planes pounded his forces and assisted the successful rebellion against his rule, is not recorded.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Iran has been under US sanctions since 1979. New sanctions have become increasingly severe in a bid to compel Iran to stop its nuclear program. They are joined by a host of United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and European Union measures.

1992: The Iran-Iraq Arms Non-Proliferation Act sanctions any entity that helps Iran with weapons development.

1995: A comprehensive ban on US trade and investment in Iran is passed.

1996: The Iran and Libya Sanctions Act limits third-party investment in Iran's energy sector to less than $20 million.

2000: The Iran-Syria-North Korea Non-Proliferation Act is passed.

After 9/11: President George W. Bush freezes assets of people and entities deemed to support terrorism. Several links to Iran are identified; dozens more are added in the next decade.

2006: The first UNSC sanctions ban nuclear, missile, and dual-use technologies, and freeze assets of people and entities involved.

2007: The second UNSC sanctions resolution imposes an arms embargo on Iran.

March 2008: The third UNSC sanctions resolution extends asset freezes and authorizes inspections of Iranian ships and aircraft.

June 2008: The EU freezes assets of dozens doing business with Bank Melli, accused of facilitating Iran's nuclear and missile efforts.

June 2010: The fourth UNSC sanctions resolution bans ballistic missile activities, freezes assets of Iran's Revolutionary Guard and Iran's state-run shipping line, and adds a host of banking restrictions. The EU bans investing in or assisting Iran's energy sector and develops its own list of asset freezes.

June-July 2010: The Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act boosts restrictions on Iran and prevents US and foreign companies from selling refined gas to Iran, or the means for Iran to expand its own refining capacity.

December 2011: A raft of new sanctions is passed by Congress, including some targeting Iran's central bank.

January 2012: The EU approves a total oil embargo on Iran, effective July 1.

February 2012: Citing "deceptive practices" of Iran's central bank, President Obama orders a freeze on all Iranian property in the US and closes loopholes used to transfer money.

March 2012: Iran is cut off from the SWIFT system, which facilitates all global electronic financial transactions.

June 2012: US sanctions against Iran's central bank go into effect.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Iran sanctions: playing the long game
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today