U.S. sanctions cover a variety of objectives related to the country`s internal and external affairs, from arms proliferation and human rights violations in Iran to state-sponsored terrorism and instability promotion abroad. They address both broad sectors and specific individuals and organizations, both Iranian nationals and foreigners dealing with sanctioned Iranians. On October 9, 2012, the President signed Presidential Decree 13628, which provides, among other things, for the implementation of certain sanctions set out in the 2012 Law on Iranian Threat Reduction and Human Rights in Syria (TRA). Section 1 of Presidential Decree 13628 provides that, in accordance with the authority conferred by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the Minister of Finance shall take steps to implement certain sanctions provided for in Section 6 of the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996, as amended (ISA), if the President, the Minister for Foreign Affairs or the Minister of Finance imposes such sanctions on a person in accordance with the provisions of the ISA. the Global Sanctions, Liability and Divestment Against Iran Act of 2010, as amended, or TRA. Article 6 of the ISA includes both blocking and non-blocking sanctions. When the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action between Iran and the P5+1 was implemented in early 2016, sanctions relief impacted the Iranian economy in four ways:[158] Iran relies on regional economies to conduct private and government activities. In 2018, in the United States. Trade relations with neighbouring countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq, which had improved significantly before 2016, have suffered a blow.
[126] In November 2019, as financial sanctions were further tightened by the Trump administration and the devaluation of the rial continued, a subsequent rise in energy prices led to widespread protests and violent clashes in Tehran and other major cities. The economies of border regions with urban areas, such as Zahedan, felt the most drastic effects, as traders had to pay more for imports, for example, electronic devices, while at the same time the value of exports of industrial goods such as Persian carpets decreased. [127] The Iraqi economy has also been severely affected by ongoing financial sanctions, as Iran is a major exporter of wheat to Iraq and food prices in Iraq have risen since 2016. [128] The second sanctions imposed by the United States in 1987 under Ronald Reagan for Iran`s actions against the United States and other ships in the Persian Gulf from 1981 to 1987 and for their support for terrorism. [1] Sanctions were extended in 1995 to companies dealing with the Iranian government. [2] The Congressional Research Service (CRS) provides an in-depth look at the U.S. and international sanctions regimes against Iran. A separate report by crS unpacks presidential and congressional agencies regarding the lifting of U.S. sanctions against Iran.
Over the years, sanctions have severely affected the Iranian economy and the Iranian people. Since 1979, the United States has led international efforts to use sanctions to influence Iran`s policies,[4] including Iran`s uranium enrichment program, which Western governments fear will develop the capability to produce nuclear weapons. Iran counters that its nuclear program is used for civilian purposes, including electricity generation and medical purposes. [5] The Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA) was enacted on August 5, 1996 (H.R. 3107, P.L. 104-172). [33] (ILSA was renamed the Iran Sanctions Act (ISA) in 2006 when sanctions on Libya were lifted. 33]) On July 31, 2013, members of the U.S. House of Representatives voted 400 to 20 in favor of enhanced sanctions. [34] Given that nuclear sanctions would be lifted by the executive branch in the early years of a possible deal, not repealed by the legislature, the White House argued that if Iran violated the deal, the president could „reverse“ the sanctions and reintroduce them without legislative hurdles. On the opposition side, it is claimed that sanctions are a way to promote nationalist values and diminish the culture of a state.
In the counter-argument, support is argued on the basis that something needs to be done, and the theory of democratic peace is cited as sound reasoning despite possible cultural insensitivity. In the case of the United States, it is important to note that the United States has little to lose in terms of public perception, as many in the world already have an aversion to America`s international politics and actions. At the time of the deal, the administration of then-US President Barack Obama expressed confidence that the JCPOA would prevent Iran from secretly building a nuclear program. Iran has pledged to „exceptional and robust monitoring, verification and inspection.“ Britain, Germany and France, all opposed to the sanctions, have set up an alternative payment mechanism designed to help international companies trade with Iran without facing US sanctions. The United States, the United Nations and the European Union have imposed several sanctions on Iran for its nuclear program since the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA), the United Nations nuclear regulatory agency, determined in September 2005 that Tehran was not complying with its international obligations. The United States has led international efforts to financially isolate Tehran and block its oil exports in order to increase the cost of Iran`s efforts to develop a potential nuclear weapons capability and bring its government to the negotiating table. The three categories are a general explanation of why sanctions are imposed on nations, but this does not go so far as to say that voting members have the same political reasons for imposing them. It often happens that many nations are motivated by their own interests in one or more categories when they vote on whether to sanction or not. The Biden administration is seeking to strengthen enforcement of sanctions against Iran, according to senior U.S. officials, the first sign that Washington is intensifying economic pressure on Tehran as diplomatic efforts to reinstate the 2015 nuclear deal fail.
In November 2013, Iran and the P5+1 signed an interim agreement known as the Joint Plan of Action (JPA), which provided for sanctions relief and access to $4.2 billion of previously frozen assets in exchange for limiting uranium enrichment and international inspectors` access to sensitive sites. The APP capped Iran`s crude exports at 1.1 million barrels per day, less than half the level of 2011 exports. . .
