Authors: Meng Sitong (PhD student, Institute of Ocean Development, Ocean University of China) Zhao Wanyi (Professor, School of Civil and Commercial Law, Southwest University of Political Science and Law)
Since the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the United States and its allies have adopted multiple rounds of economic sanctions against Russia, which has not only hindered the alleviation of the crisis, but also made the "obstruction" of the global supply chain more serious, adding more instability factors to the world economy, which is already struggling to recover due to the new crown epidemic. The imposition of unilateral sanctions on other countries is not an occasional act of the United States, but a long-standing tactic. The U.S. use of unilateral sanctions can be traced back to the period of U.S. independence and rise. Today, unilateral sanctions have become the norm and even the preferred means for the United States to handle international relations. According to the sanctions list issued by the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), up to now, the United States has sanctioned 180 countries and regions, and 515 Chinese entities, individuals, aircraft and ships have been included. It can be said that the United States is the country in the world that uses unilateral sanctions the most, with the widest scope and the greatest impact.
The United States has long used its domestic law to sanction other countries with "long-arm jurisdiction", and unilateral sanctions are an important form. In order to express its dissatisfaction with other countries, the United States relies on domestic laws and regulations to extend its tentacles abroad, and exercises legal, political, military, diplomatic, economic and other multi-dimensional control over foreign countries, forcing the sanctioned countries to change policies or behaviors that are not conducive to the interests of the United States itself, which is a "clever" international political means different from hard military conflicts. An important reason why the United States can extend its power tentacles to the international stage is the key supplier role of the United States in the international economic and trade market and the core position of the dollar in international settlement. It is precisely by abusing its absolute discourse and control in the global economy and legal system that the United States realizes hegemonism and power politics that serve only its own interests.
Former U.S. Commerce Secretary Ross commented after the Meng Wanzhou incident: "We are now informing the world with practical actions that all individuals and economic entities that violate the U.S. economic sanctions program and fail to comply with U.S. export control laws will be punished by the United States." "Combined with practice, the unilateral sanctions of the United States in recent years have mainly changed three trends: First, the basis and scope of sanctions have been expanded in an all-round way. The domestic laws cited by the United States are becoming more and more extensive, even expanding the legal influence of all economic laws and economic-related criminal law; Scope: through the frequent use of secondary sanctions, third States are forced to passively join their sanctions frameworks. Second, the form of sanctions has been increased at the upper levels. Once the United States believes that a legal fact has occurred that can initiate economic sanctions, after Congress passes the sanctions bill, the president will issue an executive order corresponding to it, and OFAC will issue one or more specific sanctions regulations before implementation, forming a conical coordination mechanism with politics as the rule, legislative, law enforcement, and judicial layers. Third, the likelihood of sanctioned parties accessing due process protections is extremely low. After OFAC conducts an investigation, it negotiates three different agreements with sanctioned parties: non-prosecution agreements, deferred prosecution agreements, and plea agreements. Because of the disparity in power between the negotiating parties, about 95 percent of federal cases are settled by plea settlement, and many punishments cannot enter the judicial process and are directly enforced by U.S. law enforcement agencies.
According to the relevant provisions of the UN Charter, the right to identify and make decisions on the implementation of economic sanctions belongs to the UN Security Council, and UN economic sanctions resolutions are universally legally binding and must be implemented by all UN Member States, while the United States has not been given any legal right to impose unilateral sanctions on behalf of the UN Security Council. The economic sanctions imposed by the United States are more hegemonic acts that have no basis in international law, even violate the principles of its domestic law, and are not reasonable.
U.S. economic sanctions have no basis in international law. From a treaty perspective, the recent extreme economic sanctions imposed by the United States on Russia are not based on Security Council resolutions. At its 49th session, the UN Human Rights Council submitted a resolution calling on States to stop unilateral sanctions, which was adopted by 27 votes in favor, 14 against and 6 abstentions, demonstrating that unilateral sanctions are unpopular in the international community. The unilateral sanctions imposed by the United States are precisely actions that bypass the international legal system with the United Nations at its core. From the perspective of legal principles, the high-level economic sanctions imposed by the United States after withdrawing from the Iranian nuclear agreement in 2018 violated the principle that treaties must be observed; The goal of the US sanctions against Iraq and Cuba is not to change their policies, but to overthrow their regimes. The United States, which failed to achieve its goal, brazenly launched a war against Iraq in 2003, and only then ended sanctions against Iraq. According to Iraqi Health Minister Hosni Mubarak, 13 years of sanctions have killed 1.732 million people due to lack of medical care and malnutrition. At the same time, the economic blockade imposed by the United States against Cuba has lasted for 60 years and continues because it has not renounced the socialist system, in violation of the principles of the sovereign equality of States and non-interference in the internal affairs of other States. From a practical point of view, Security Council resolutions have essentially become a source of international law. In 1996, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution emphasizing the heavy impact of unilateral economic sanctions on third countries and calling on Member States to prohibit the imposition of unilateral economic sanctions on any country; In 2002, the resolution on the elimination of unilateral external coercive economic measures as a means of political and economic compulsion was adopted; The adoption of a resolution in 2011 rejecting the use of unilateral economic measures as a means of political and economic coercion against developing countries; The 29th resolution passed in 2021 demanding that the United States lift the embargo and economic sanctions imposed on Cuba shows that the economic sanctions of the United States ignore the substantive justice of international law.
U.S. economic sanctions even violate the principles of its domestic law. The Restatement of the U.S. Foreign Relations Act (III) provides that jurisdiction over conduct outside the borders of another country presupposes that the act produces or is intended to produce practical effects within its territory. The regulation itself has been questioned by the international community, but this "fig leaf" alone has not been strictly complied with by the United States. When the United States implements unilateral sanctions, it is accustomed to "endangering national security" as the "actual effect" of other countries' actions on the United States, however, the US economic sanctions against Huawei are a typical counterexample, and the United States has not provided any reliable evidence to prove the "actual effect" of its claim of "endangering national security". The serious issue of national security has become a "golden oil" for the United States to abuse unilateral sanctions.
The increasing reliance and abuse of unilateral sanctions by the United States has imposed its "zero-sum game" mentality on the international community, becoming a catalyst for the intensification of international conflicts and contradictions, and violating the international community's pursuit of modern international relations with justice, peace and development as the background, and is a reversal of history. In today's world, multilateral mechanisms have become the mainstream of international affairs, and unilateralism can no longer prevail as it did in the past. If US economic sanctions continue to serve power politics, the eventual bankruptcy of economic sanctions will be a historical necessity from the perspective of international political development. In his important speech at the summit commemorating the 75th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations, President Xi Jinping stressed: "The relations and interests of various countries can only be coordinated by systems and rules, and no one with the biggest fist can listen to whom." Modern international relations are no longer a power game played by certain hegemonic powers, and international law is not a tool for hegemonic countries to "use them when they agree, and abandon them if they do not."
Guang Ming Daily(Version 04, 02023-05-02)
Source: Guangming Network - Guangming Daily