Study of U.S. Unilateral Sanctions
1997-2001

Executive Summary

New unilateral sanctions continue to be imposed by the United States, but less frequently than in the late 1990s, according to this report by Professor Barry Carter of the Georgetown University Law Center. Notably, the study also finds that today unilateral sanctions are often more targeted than those imposed before 1996, a significant change from previous practice. For instance, new "smart" sanctions often freeze the assets of people and groups believed to be involved in terrorism, drug production, or proliferation of weapons of mass destruction - and less often apply to entire nations. However, broad unilateral sanctions designed to impact the behavior of other nations are still in use.

New Unilateral Sanctions

As earlier studies have reported, in 1996 alone, the U.S. imposed 26 new unilateral sanctions. USA*Engage's analysis of the Carter Study indicates that between 1997 and the end of 2001, 59 new U.S. unilateral sanctions were imposed - a significant drop in the 1996 annual rate. Moreover, between 1997 and 2001, 26 existing unilateral sanctions were removed from the books.

Definition of Unilateral Sanctions

In the absence of a universally accepted definition of unilateral sanctions, the author has drawn extensively from the work of previous authoritative compilations, including the 1997 President's Export Council report, and studies by the Congressional Reference Service, the Institute for International Economics, and the Brookings Institution. This study serves to update reports that were compiled in 1996 and 1997.

In the definition of unilateral sanctions the author includes the blocking of assets and a prohibition on commerce, including trade and investment, with a foreign country. This includes withholding financial assistance or U.S. government procurement, as well as the opposition by U.S. representatives in international financial institutions to loans or financial aid to that country. Because of the growing use of sanctions against non-state actors, such as organizations and individuals, the study takes note of them and lists them in a separate category at its conclusion.

This definition includes:

• Unilateral sanctions which the U.S. has imposed without the participation of other governments. It excludes U.S. participation in multilateral sanctions and sanctions taken pursuant to U.N. Security Council action.
  
  
• Unilateral sanctions aimed at influencing the external or internal behavior of a foreign government in areas such as foreign policy or human rights practices, but not those taken to obtain trade or commercial objectives under the trade remedy laws of the United States.
  
  
• Measures that condition an economic sanction on specific actions by a foreign country, such as suspension of foreign assistance in the event that a country is designated as engaging in religious persecution, or has a coup d'etat against an elected government.

The study also includes the suspension of foreign assistance and government financing programs in its definition of unilateral economic sanctions. Terminating or suspending foreign assistance is frequently used in hopes that it will influence the behavior of foreign governments. This is also true of the business facilitation programs of the U.S. government, such as the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, the Export-Import Bank, and the Trade and Development Agency. These measures are included on the basis of their use as instruments of economic leverage on non-economic behavior of foreign governments.

Sanctions Lists

The study contains the following lists of unilateral sanctions:

• A chronological list of new unilateral sanctions imposed by the U.S. on foreign governments between 1997 and 2001, including removal of sanctions;
• A list of U.S. sanctions imposed on non-state actors;
• An alphabetical list of countries under U.S sanctions.