International sanctions legislation in the U.S., EU and UK: a comparative study

International sanctions legislation in the U.S., EU and UK:
a comparative study



Article received: 01.06.2022. Accepted: 02.09.2022
DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2022.06.11

For citation:

Arapova E.Ya., Kudinov A.S. International sanctions legislation in the U.S., EU and UK: a comparative study. – Polis. Political Studies. 2022. No. 6. P. 151-165. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.06.11



Abstract

In recent years, unilateral restrictive measures have become a widespread instrument of foreign policy, and the process of their legalization has sharply accelerated. The article compares the sanctions legislation in the US, the EU and the UK in relation to the countries’ political interests and priorities. The authors carried out a comparative analysis of sanctions areas and targeting, differences in their approaches to “humanitarian exemptions”, the level of judicial control, as well as sub-sanctioned jurisdictions that predetermine the effects of sanctions not only for the targets, but also for third countries and actors. Today, the harmonization of the US, EU and UK sanctions regimes is becoming more and more obvious. The US sanctions course led to the formalization of similar regimes in the EU and the UK, which dealt with chemical weapons, human rights and cyber security. At the same time, the EU does not allow its members to use sanctions as a tool of economic competition, while the US sanctions legislation is based on the “threats to national security” criterion (in the broad sense), which has no direct link to international law. The EU has a relatively higher level of judicial control over the compilation of sanctions lists. While it was up until recently in line with the EU take on sanctions, the UK, has recently expanded the interpretation of the British Nexus, making its sanctions policy increasingly in line with the American approach, as reflected by the gradual replication of the practice of secondary sanctions. 

Keywords
international sanctions, sanctions legislation, USA, European Union, Great Britain, comparative law, humanitarian exceptions to sanctions, extraterritoriality, appeal of sanctions.


References

Eckes, C. (2019). EU sanctions regime cannot be an ‘EU Magnitsky Act’. EUobserver. https://euobserver.com/opinion/144968

Giumelli, F. (2013). Beyond intergovernmentalism: the Europeanization of restrictive measures? Journal of Contemporary European Research, 9(3), 390‐405.

Kamminga, M.T. (2012). Extraterritoriality. Gross violations – Comity – Jurisdiction of states, extra-territorial. In Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (pp. 1070-1077). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Montaldo, S., Costamagna, F., & Miglio, A. (2020). EU Law enforcement. The evolution of sanctioning powers. New York: Routledge.

Nephew, R., & Mortlock, D. (2017). Brexit’s Implications for UK and European sanctions policy. New York: Columbia University in the City of New York.

Portela, C. (2020). A blacklist is (almost) born: building a resilient EU human rights sanctions regime. European Union Institute for Security Studies. https://www.iss.europa.eu/content/blacklist-almost-born

Ryngaert, C. (2015). Jurisdiction in international law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.   

 

 

Artyushkin, V.F., Kazantzev, A.A., & Sergeev, V.M. 2021. Balance of power between the G-20 states: analysis with multidimensional scaling method. Polis. Political Studies, 2, 125-138. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.02.09

Bogaturov, A.D. (2019). The Chinese angle in the world-system management. Polis. Political Studies, 5, 85-95. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.05.07

Danilin, I.V. (2020a). The U.S.-China technology war: risks and opportunities for P.R.C. and global tech sector. Comparative Politics Russia, 11(4), 160-176. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24411/2221-3279-2020-10056

Danilin, I.V. (2020b). Conceptualizing American strategy in the technology war against China: economy, geopolitics, techno-nationalism. Journal of International Analytics, 11(4), 21-38. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.46272/2587-8476-2020-11-4-21-38

Glandin, S. (2018). The exterritorial effect of American sanctions. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, 8(2), 10122. (In Russ.) https://di.org/10.21128/2226-2059-2018-2-105-122

Glandin, S.V., & Panov, F.Yu. (2020). Sanctions and restrictive measures of the United Kingdom before and past Brexit. Zakon, 6, 149. (In Russ.)

Morozov, V.A. (2019). Sanctions policy: a review of the Russian International Affairs Council’s publications. International Organisations Research Journal, 14(3), 151-157. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2019-03-08

Politika sankcij: celi, strategii, instrumenty: hrestomatiya [The policy of sanctions: goals, strategies, tools: anthology]. (2018). Moscow: Russian International Affairs Council. (In Russ.)

Timofeev, I.N. (2018). Sanctions against Russia: directions of escalation and policy of counteraction. Report of the Russian International Affairs Council, 37. (In Russ.) https://russiancouncil.ru/papers/Sanctions-Report37ru.pdf (accessed 15.09.2021).

Timofeev, I.N. (2020). “Sanctions for sanctions violation”: U.S. Department of Treasury enforcement actions against financial sector. Polis. Political Studies, 6, 73-90. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2020.06.06

Vojnikov, V.V. (2015). The EU vs. Russia: legal nature and implementation of the Union’s restrictive measures. Baltijskij region, 1, 89-100. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.5922/2074-9848-2015-1-5

 

Content No. 6, 2022

See also:


Korgun I.A., Toloraya G.D.,
On the question of effectiveness of sanctions against DPRK. – Polis. Political Studies. 2022. No3

Bartenev V.I.,
International assistance and sanctions pressure: geometry of interlinkages. – Polis. Political Studies. 2022. No6

Timofeev I.N.,
The U.S. Sanctions Against Iran: Experience and Eventual Implications. – Polis. Political Studies. 2018. No4

Timofeev I.N.,
“Sanctions for Sanctions Violation”: U.S. Department of Treasury Enforcement Actions against Financial Sector. – Polis. Political Studies. 2020. No6

Suvakovic U.,
Political parties as traditional mechanisms of representation in modern societies. – Polis. Political Studies. 2010. No2

 

   

Introducing an article



Polis. Political Studies
4 2017


Vainshtein G.I.
Modern Populism as a Subject of Political Science

 The article text 
 

Archive

   2024      2023      2022      2021   
   2020      2019      2018      2017      2016   
   2015      2014      2013      2012      2011   
   2010      2009      2008      2007      2006   
   2005      2004      2003      2002      2001   
   2000      1999      1998      1997      1996   
   1995      1994      1993      1992      1991