The New York Times acknowledges that US sanctions against Venezuela, Cuba and Syria are negative for Washington

This Saturday’s American newspaper The New York Times published an opinion piece acknowledging that the United States (US) had imposed sanctions against Venezuela, Cuba and Syria. “Horrible Record” Because they have had disastrous consequences for those people and at the same time have been counterproductive to Washington’s interests.

The paper mentions the risks it considers “One of the most severe tools “In the US Foreign Policy Armory”. According to the information provided, the North American country “represents 42%” of the coercive measures imposed worldwide since 1950.

“Economic barriers are gone Instrument of first resort For American politicians, it reads. In this sense, the number of names on the penalty list of the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control has increased to 9,421 in 2021, he adds. “Three names will be added to the list per day”.

Counter-Effects of Obstacles

Although the paper considers coercion and unilateral measures as alternatives to a successful diplomacy, it also indicates that they create. adverse effects.

“While sanctions are easy to impose, even when they no longer serve US interests, they are politically and bureaucratically difficult to remove. Sanctions also escape considerable public scrutiny. Certain authorities are responsible for ensuring that the purpose of a particular permit is being worked out rather than needlessly harming innocent people or undermining foreign policy objectives.”.

In this sense, the article confirms Obstacles imposed upon Venezuela, Cuba And Syria It created a backlash for America. “Blacklisting of Venezuela’s Oil Sector Has Exacerbated Humanitarian Crisis”Indicates the text.

Then add: “Sanctions on the oil industry, which accounts for 90% of the country’s exports, made dramatic cuts Significant increase in government revenue and poverty”.

According to the Treasury Department, sanctions must be properly evaluated to ensure they are the right instrument for the circumstances. According to the company, there should be measures “Attached to specific results“ When they wantBe careful to minimize “unintended economic and political impacts.”

Finally, the article acknowledges that coercive and unilateral measures must have remedial objectives and criteria. If those parameters are not met,” the report concludes.There is a risk of going against the interests and American policies“.

related to