Free ponies and sanctioning Iran

Posted By Daniel W. Drezner Monday, August 3, 2009 - 12:58 PM Share

In a legen -- wait for it -- dary blog post, Belle Waring mentioned the pony problem in public policy.  Namely, "an infallible way to improve any public policy wishes. You just wish for the thing, plus, wish that everyone would have their own pony!"

I bring this up because of David Sanger's New York Times story about the prospects of imposing a gasoline embargo on Iran:  

The Obama administration is talking with allies and Congress about the possibility of imposing an extreme economic sanction against Iran if it fails to respond to President Obama's offer to negotiate on its nuclear program: cutting off the country’s imports of gasoline and other refined oil products....

But enforcing what would amount to a gasoline embargo has long been considered risky and extremely difficult; it would require the participation of Russia and China, among others that profit from trade with Iran. Iran has threatened to respond by cutting off oil exports and closing shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, at a moment that the world economy is highly vulnerable.

The rest of the story is kind of irrelevant -- because without China and Russia, this is just a theoretical exercise.  In fact, here's a good time-saver:  if you read any story about a gasoline embargo o Iran, just scan quickly and get to the part where the reporter explains how and why Russia and China would go along.  If it's not mentioned, the story is inconsequential. 

If you want China and Russia to agree to sanctions, should you wish for the free pony as well?  Here the growth of dissent in Iran complicates an already complicated picture.  I'm betting that Moscow and Beijing have observed the "Death to Russia!" and "Death to China!" chants among the protestors.  This is likely going to make them even more reluctant to do anything that undermines the current regime (even if this hurts their long-term interests).  Which a gasoline embargo would most certainly do. 

Do I think a gasoline embargo is a good idea?  Absolutely.  Do I think it will happen?  No, I don't. 

UPDATE:  Spencer Ackerman reacts the same way I do.  The Weekly Standard's Michael Goldfarb is more optimistic. 

EXPLORE:U.S. FOREIGN POLICY, CHINA, IRAN, OBAMA, REALISM, RUSSIA, SANCTIONS
 

AVRAM

3:27 PM ET

August 3, 2009

Embargo

Drezner thinks adding gasoline embargo to Iran is a good idea!!!! Why? Dracconian sanctions on Iraq after the first world war worked very well, hasn't it? The only thing that will happen with an embargo is the suffering of average person. But, Drezner and his ilk probably doesn't think Iranians are people like the Americans, Westerners and Israelis. The suffering of average Iraqis and Iranians doesn't have much weight. When Churchill gassed the Kurds he was a national hero. When Saddam did it, he became a war criminal. Only that it took us about two decades to realize it. The hypocricy the likes of Drezner puts out is insulting to anyone paying attention. The only country that needs a little bit of sanctions in the middleeast is the country that already has a nuclear bomb and is not part of the NPT and threatening a non-nuclear nation with bombing. Lets talk about Israels threats to a non-nuclear nation if it doesn't stop Iran's rights under NPT to enrich uranium. What about the technincal support promised under NPT for non-nuclear nations? Is Iran under any obligations to follow NPT since the nations promising it technology to develop peaceful nuclear technology has breached?
What about some sanctions on Israel for devloping nuclear weapons outside of NPT? What about it Drezner? Can we talk about? Do I think it is a good idea? Yes. Do I think the likes of Drezner will make it happen? No, Idon't.

 

JAYESLOS

5:07 PM ET

August 3, 2009

How is this Embargo different from any other Embargo?

Do you think an embargo on gasoline would hurt the government, instead of being like every other embargo, i.e., that it hurts civilians terribly and the government not at all?

What would make this embargo target the people in power instead of the powerless?

 

BLUE13326

5:13 PM ET

August 3, 2009

But there's so many free

But there's so many free ponies...

Like when those on the left, including pundits here like Stephen Walt, bought into the Kerry campaign line that Iraq made us 'take our eye off the ball' in Afghanistan; how the situation there deteriorated because of Iraq.

Now, we've got our eyes squarely on the ball in Afghanistan, and what happens? The bloodiest month of the war yet for US troops, and the British panicking as they see their war dead mount.

Hmmm...maybe it wasn't Iraq after all that was the problem...maybe, just maybe Afghanistan just isn't the kind of place that's going to be conquered, just ask the Soviets, the British, etc.

Maybe that free pony that allowed those on the left to think the 'good war' in Afghanistan would go swimmingly if we'd just take our eyes off the 'bad war' in Iraq never really existed...

 

BRETT

12:23 AM ET

August 4, 2009

Like we need yet another

Like we need yet another open-ended embargo. When are they going to learn that open-ended embargoes do not? Eventually, the country finds a way around it, with one or two exceptions that prove the rule.

 

THESCHLEPPER

10:21 PM ET

August 4, 2009

May as well ask for a unicorn while you're at it

These sanctions are not going to happen. China and Russia are going to take a pass and, using that as cover, most of the EU will as well. US sanctions have a very bad name in that part of the world and, if they are not properly targeted, generally backfire.
http://theschlepper.wordpress.com/2009/08/04/sanctioning-bad-behavior/#more-52

 

Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.

Read More