Diplomacy
Economic sanctions, a political tool
Sanctions are a part of international diplomacy in today’s world, applied by sanctioning countries as a non-military tool to force the target countries to respond in a desired manner. In fact, sanctions are an economic weapon in the field of non-military struggle that takes diplomacy beyond the level of negotiation and into the realm of action.
Sanctions are usually designed in terms of three objectives: offensive, defensive, and communicative.
In the offensive dimension, the goal of the sanctioning country is to change a specific behavior of the target country. In other words, the sanctioning country tries to change the behavior and actions of the sanctioned state by applying pressure. In the defensive dimension, the goal of the sanction is to slow down the development process and reduce the strategic capabilities of the target country.
In the communication dimension, sanctions can be used as a tool to convey the message of the sanctioning country’s dissatisfaction with the policies or actions of the sanctioned country. Sanctions are imposed on countries in both political and economic areas. In the political dimension, the goal of sanctions is to force the target country to comply with the policies of the sanctioning countries. These types of sanctions can be imposed with goals such as overthrowing the political system of the target country or demonstrating the power of the sanctioning country.
In the economic dimension, sanctions may be imposed to pressure a country to change its political behavior or to destabilize the economy and domestic politics of the target country. Sanctions can be imposed unilaterally, multilaterally, or comprehensively. Unilateral sanctions are imposed by one country against another without regard to UN Security Council resolutions.
Comprehensive or global sanctions are adopted by international bodies such as the United Nations or the Security Council and are intended to change the policy or behavior of the targeted country. Multilateral sanctions are imposed by several countries or international organizations with different motives and often have a greater impact on the sanctioned country.
Economic sanctions
One of the most common types of sanctions globally is economic sanctions, which are implemented with the aim of weakening the economic power of the target country. In this type of sanction, the sanctioning country attempts to expose the target government’s inefficiency and make it appear incapable of responding to the needs of its citizens.
Economic sanctions inflict a heavy blow on the country’s economy; they cause a decrease in national output, a depreciation of the currency, an increase in unemployment, a rise in prices, and a budget deficit. These sanctions also lead to a significant decrease in gross domestic product, a decrease in exports and imports, an outflow of foreign capital, and a contraction in international investment.
A country that is subject to severe economic sanctions will, over time, face economic fragility and disrupt the balance between supply and demand, which will ultimately lead to economic stagnation.
Economic sanctions as a political tool
Hegemonic powers such as the United States, due to their political, economic, ideological, and military superiority, have always tried to shape the international system based on their interests and institutionalize the acceptance of their hegemony among other countries. Economic sanctions are an alternative to military power and reflect the anger and dissatisfaction of the sanctioning country with the policies of the target country.
United States uses economic sanctions as an effective political tool to impose its demands and national interests
These sanctions are usually imposed against developing countries or political regimes opposed to the United States.
Economic sanctions can have profound negative consequences in the political, social, economic, and legal spheres. These types of sanctions can also be called “international sanctions” because they are implemented with the aim of imposing trade restrictions, investment bans, increasing customs tariffs, restricting financial relations, and preventing the transfer of technology.
Economic sanctions can be imposed for a variety of reasons, but one of the most important is to change the political system of the target country. Sanctions are sometimes not only intended to isolate a country, but can also serve to overthrow its political system. A historical example of this type of sanctions is the economic and political pressure on Iran during the prime ministership of Dr. Mohammad Mosaddegh.
After the nationalization of the oil industry in 1950, Britain and the United States imposed an oil embargo and imposed severe financial restrictions to suppress this anti-colonial movement. These sanctions, aimed at weakening the Iranian economy, led to internal crises and ultimately the coup of 1953 that overthrew the Mossadegh government.
Sanctions are often designed to create internal unrest by pressuring the public and creating public discontent, in the hope that this discontent will lead to regime change. Another reason for imposing sanctions is to change the policy and policy of the target country.
Sanctions are powerful tools in international relations and are sometimes designed to force target countries to change their policies.
The purpose of sanctions, or so-called restrictions and pressure, is to force the target country to accept the demands of the international community or the sanctioning country. This pressure is usually applied in the form of economic, trade, financial or even diplomatic barriers.
The sanctioning country attempts to force the policymakers of the target country to change course and accept its demands by increasing costs and reducing benefits. Sanctions create indirect pressure on policymakers and decision-makers by affecting the country’s economic and social structure.
These sanctions restrict trade by reducing access to financial resources, technology, and technology, and cause welfare problems for citizens. The combination of factors that sanctions impose on the social and economic structure of society leads to the formation of public dissatisfaction and internal pressure on the government.
Prominent examples of sanctions aimed at changing the domestic policy of the target country were the sanctions imposed by the United Nations and Western countries on South Africa in the 1970s and 1980s. These sanctions were imposed due to apartheid and racial discrimination policies and included trade restrictions, sports embargoes, and blocking access to international financial markets.
Economic pressures, trade restrictions, and diplomatic isolation forced the South African government to move toward a more democratic and open system. Another important example is the sanctions imposed on Iran by the UN Security Council, the European Union, and the United States over its nuclear program.
These sanctions, which intensified in the early 2000s, imposed restrictions on oil exports, imports of sensitive technologies, and access to the global banking system. The aim of these sanctions was to force Iran to halt sensitive nuclear activities.
Sanctions are also imposed to weaken the economic structure of the target country
This effective tool limits the executive power of the target country to advance policies by reducing its financial and economic strength. This is done by creating barriers to access to global markets, advanced technologies, exports and imports, and freezing foreign assets.
Such restrictions can disrupt supply chains, reduce foreign exchange earnings, and halt the target country’s development or military programs. A prime example of these effects is the sanctions imposed on Iran, which have had particularly devastating effects on the oil and gas sector.
Declining oil revenues have led to a decline in domestic investment, high inflation, and a devaluation of the national currency. Banking sanctions have also restricted international trade, making it difficult to import essential goods and increasing economic and social pressure.
Sanctions accelerate the process of policy change by targeting the economic structure of the target country. In this type of sanctions, international financial resources are blocked and the bank accounts and foreign exchange reserves of the target country are frozen. This blockage increases the costs of production and imports and ultimately leads to the inability of the target country to pay its debts.
When exports and imports are restricted, key industries such as oil and gas are affected. Economic restrictions prevent access to advanced technologies and hinder economic development. This leads to higher inflation rates, economic stagnation, devaluation of the national currency, reduced foreign investment, and increased unemployment, ultimately putting more domestic pressure on the government.
Sanctions are often imposed in response to specific actions by countries.
These actions may include human rights violations, support for terrorism, or military aggression. Examples of this type of sanctions include sanctions imposed on Russia for its annexation of Crimea and its military aggression against Ukraine.
In response to the invasion of Ukraine, the United States, the European Union, the United Nations, and the Security Council imposed sweeping sanctions that have dealt a heavy blow to the Russian economy. These sanctions have included the removal of Russian banks from the SWIFT financial system, the freezing of central bank assets, and restrictions on dollar and euro transactions. Exports of advanced technology, military equipment, and sensitive industries such as oil and gas to Russia have also been banned. These measures have led to a depreciation of the ruble, rising inflation, and stagnation in key sectors of the Russian economy. Restrictions on access to foreign currency and advanced technologies have posed serious challenges to Russian industries.
In fact, economic sanctions are political tools that powerful and hegemonic countries use to implement national interests, exert power, and control the international order. Economic sanctions can cause a decrease in production, a collapse in the value of the national currency, an increase in unemployment, a decrease in investment, and inflation.
These sanctions are designed with various motives and goals and are usually imposed by developed countries against developing countries. These pressures are applied with the aim of forcing countries to accept the policies of the sanctioning country and have both positive and negative consequences. Economic pressure and sanctions cause inflation and public discontent, which can lead to political and social instability in the target country.
On the positive side, sanctions may lead to greater self-sufficiency, de-dependence, and independence for the sanctioned country. Sanctions force governments to increase their focus on domestic production and take measures to counter the pressures.
Diplomacy
South Korea pulls part of embassy staff from Ukraine amid POW dispute
The South Korean government has decided to withdraw part of its embassy staff from Ukraine.
According to the Yonhap news agency, Foreign Ministry spokesman Park Doo-sun cited the Kyiv administration’s failure to take “positive steps” in the dispute that began with the leak of information concerning the handover of North Korean prisoners of war as the justification for the move.
The spokesman also listed the ongoing threat of air strikes, which complicates the safety of diplomats, among the reasons.
Following the withdrawal of part of the personnel, essential diplomatic contacts will continue under the leadership of the charge d’affaires ad interim to Ukraine. All consular staff tasked with protecting South Korean citizens will remain in Ukraine.
Prior to this move, the Seoul administration decided on 8 October to withdraw its ambassador. The Foreign Ministry stated at the time that it was ready to continue consultations with Kyiv to resolve the emerging issues constructively.
Tensions between the two countries began with a speech delivered by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the United Nations General Assembly in September.
Zelenskyy announced that two captured soldiers from the North Korean army had been handed over to South Korea.
South Korean President Lee Jae-myung, meanwhile, accused Kyiv of breaching a confidentiality agreement.
Lee said the disclosure of this information endangered the prisoners’ families and stability on the Korean Peninsula.
Seoul expects a public apology
Dmytro Lytvyn, an adviser to the Ukrainian president, denied the existence of a confidentiality agreement.
The South Korean Foreign Ministry summoned Ukrainian Charge d’Affaires Andriy Veshkin on 28 September and issued a note of protest against Lytvyn’s remarks.
President Lee Jae-myung warned in a statement on 2 October that they would take additional measures against Kyiv if Ukrainian authorities did not acknowledge the agreement and make a public apology. Lee stated that Ukraine itself had initially requested that the transfer of the prisoners be kept confidential.
Ukrainian Foreign Ministry spokesman Heorhii Tykhyi said the dispute stemmed from differing interpretations of the confidentiality regime.
Tykhyi noted that Seoul, based on its constitution which recognises the entire Korean Peninsula as its own territory, requested that the prisoners be handed over “like its own citizens”.
Describing the handover as a “gesture of goodwill”, Tykhyi stated that they were conducting closed-door negotiations to resolve differences of opinion.
Ambassador Park Ki-chang returned to Seoul on 10 October. According to a report by The Korea Times newspaper citing the ministry, recalling the ambassador served as a diplomatic protest against the leak of information regarding the prisoners.
The newspaper wrote that South Korea had last taken a similar step in 2008 by withdrawing its ambassador to Japan.
Moscow warned foreign diplomats
On 3 October, the Russian Foreign Ministry reiterated its warning to foreign nationals, including diplomatic mission staff, against remaining in Ukraine.
The ministry recalled its advice to leave Kyiv, citing ongoing strikes against military targets.
The ministry noted that those who failed to heed the warnings would bear responsibility for the potential consequences.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in a statement on 24 September that they had no information regarding Kyiv handing over two North Korean prisoners of war to Seoul.
Peskov, noting that prisoner matters fall under the authority of the Defence Ministry and intelligence services, said, “Contacts through the special services are continuing.”
Diplomacy
Ex-BND head Hanning tied to former Mossad chief amid spy inquiry
August Hanning, who led Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND) between 1998 and 2005, was arrested on 6 October on allegations that he obtained roughly 2,000 classified agency documents and used them during contacts with intelligence officers from a foreign state.
Accused of high treason and espionage on behalf of a foreign intelligence agency, the former spy chief is alleged to have procured the documents from former BND employee Manfred D.
Prosecutors stated that the leaked records included internal briefing notes presented to senior German officials, though the Berlin government has not yet publicly disclosed which country received the classified data.
According to an exclusive report by Jake Green for The Cradle, seized email exchanges revealed extensive ties between the arrested Hanning and former Mossad director Danny Yatom.
The correspondence shows that the two former intelligence directors built an ongoing network of contacts following their public service, combining commercial ventures, efforts to secure political influence, and intelligence links.
This dynamic has triggered debate that using personal connections and official access for private gain has left Germany’s intelligence apparatus vulnerable.
Intelligence notes for 10,000 euros and campaign proposals
According to the reviewed emails, Hanning told Yatom in a 2018 message that he could prepare an “overall assessment based on information obtained from senior German officials and intelligence agencies” concerning an unidentified candidate.
The former BND head committed to completing the report by 13 July in exchange for 10,000 euros.
Contacts between the two men subsequently expanded to cover domestic political processes in Germany. Ahead of the September 2021 federal election, Yatom asked Hanning to approach leading candidates.
Describing CIY Global as a “political campaign company”, the former Mossad chief noted that he aimed to introduce its capabilities to German politicians, and he mentioned his intention in the same exchange to transfer documents concerning a cybersecurity firm.
Cybersecurity partnership and surveillance operations across Europe
The partnership between Yatom and Hanning reached beyond political lobbying initiatives into the cybersecurity sector.
Hanning reportedly served as a consultant for World Health Energy Holdings, a cybersecurity company linked to Yatom.
Firms of this type, established or managed by former intelligence personnel, provide commercial platforms on the international market for Israeli-origin surveillance, cyber intelligence, and political influence capabilities.
The operational presence of private Israeli-based surveillance technologies across Europe has recently entered judicial records through scandals in Poland, Spain, and Greece.
Polish prosecutors announced on 12 October that data collected under the previous government via Pegasus spyware against political opponents had been transferred out of the country, adding that manufacturer NSO Group maintained access to the technical infrastructure.
In Spain, the 2022 CatalanGate investigation established that at least 65 people, including politicians, lawyers, and civil society representatives, were targeted using Pegasus or Candiru software, with Citizen Lab researchers publishing strong evidence linking the operation to Spanish authorities.
In Greece, the surveillance operation targeting journalist Thanasis Koukakis and Member of the European Parliament Nikos Androulakis was determined to have used Predator software, linked to Intellexa, a company founded by former Israeli intelligence officer Tal Dilian.
In the German espionage investigation, the traffic between Hanning and Yatom involving paid reporting, contacts with electoral candidates, and commercial partnerships does not yet provide conclusive legal evidence regarding the final destination of the roughly 2,000 classified documents.
Nevertheless, the disclosed correspondence gives German investigators a concrete line of inquiry to assess whether classified state secrets reached commercial networks tied to Israeli intelligence.
Diplomacy
Trump dismisses US envoy to Greece Kimberly Guilfoyle
US President Donald Trump has dismissed Kimberly Guilfoyle, the US ambassador in Athens, following serious press reports concerning her conduct.
White House Press Secretary Katie Zacharia told reporters during her first briefing that Guilfoyle had been asked to resign.
“She was doing a good job, but we didn’t like what we read in the press,” Trump said. “She was not a member of my family. I think she dated my son a long time ago.”
In a social media post, Guilfoyle stated: “These claims are unfounded, and I will resolutely defend my name, reputation, and integrity.” She added that she was particularly proud of the embassy’s work.
According to Kathimerini, her removal came as no surprise in Washington. Days of successive disclosures and vigorous exploitation of the matter by Democrats had been inflicting political damage on the White House ahead of the sensitive midterm elections.
The US State Department was instructed not to comment, with crisis management transferred entirely to the White House.
Reports indicate that most of the president’s team swiftly favoured Guilfoyle’s dismissal, while Secretary of State Marco Rubio was reportedly uneasy with the demonstratively warm public welcome she had staged for him.
Democrats on the House Foreign Affairs Committee have called for an investigation.
“Her resignation does not absolve her of responsibility,” the lawmakers wrote, adding: “While American families struggled to make ends meet, she used her position as a Trump administration official to enrich herself.”
Chargé d’Affaires Josh Huck will assume ambassadorial duties until a successor is chosen.
Meanwhile, Guilfoyle’s departure is expected to cause delays in agreements between Greece and the US.
These include the so-called “Rubio package”, comprising approximately $4 billion in arms deals finalised only days before the secretary of state’s arrival.
Several procedural steps still remain before the contracts can be signed.
In Athens, opposition parties are demanding answers. Dimitris Mantzos of PASOK called for a detailed briefing on the agreements reached during Rubio’s visit.
-
America2 weeks agoHow will Brazil’s presidential runoff work?
-
Europe2 weeks agoBerlin Left Party backs Israel’s right to exist for coalition pact
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoThe West is preparing for war not with Russia, but with its own people, French analyst Georges Kuzmanovic insists
-
Russia2 weeks ago71 EU lawmakers demand closure of Russian Houses in 15 member states
-
Europe2 weeks agoMI6 investigates potential leaks after former BND chief is detained
-
Russia2 weeks agoUS and Russian figures discuss American stake in Nord Stream lines
-
Russia2 weeks agoDrone strike shuts down Yandex data centre in Russia’s Ryazan region
-
America2 weeks agoTrump weighs presidential memorandum to cut surging US diesel prices
