Are EU restrictive measures really targeted, temporary and preventive? The case of Belarus

Abstract

Questions related to the EU’s ability to foster change in the behaviour of third countries through sanctions have gained salience over the past three decades. This article explores how the nature and type of EU restrictive measures, initially conceived as targeted, preventive and temporary measures, have evolved considerably since then. The EU sanctions against Belarus are used as an illustrative case study in order to shed light on the evolutions within the EU’s sanctions practice. This article first examines the erosion of the targeted character of EU sanctions against Belarus through the broadening of listing criteria and the increasing recourse to sectoral sanctions. It then questions the temporary character of EU sanctions against Belarus by highlighting their indefinite duration and cyclicity. Last but not least, it is argued that EU sanctions against Belarus have an increasingly punitive character. The article concludes with an analysis of the implications that the EU’s evolving sanctions practice can have for the current EU’s sanctions policy toward Belarus as well as for its other sanctions regimes.

Theoretical and methodological aspects of the Western sanctions policy research

“…Сегодня результаты исследования М. Хойпель особенно актуальны. Если в 1990-е годы в санкционной политике произошли структурные изменения в пользу защиты прав человека (в исследованиях этот момент получил название "санкционная революция" [Miadzvetskaya, Challet 2022]), то сейчас, по сути, в странах G7 наблюдается отход от этих убеждений. Теперь термином "санкционная революция" называют события 2022 г., когда интенсивность санкционной политики беспрецедентно возросла [Portela, Kluge 2022].…”

Court of Justice of the European Union, European Court of Human Rights, respect for human rights and restrictive sanctions

“…215, par. 2 TFEU in application of which the Council may adopt "restrictive measures against natural or legal persons, groups or non-state entities" (Bulterman, 2006;Wessel, Anttila, Obenhaimer, Ursu, 2020;Miadzvetskaya, Challet, 2022) 12This provision accompanies the decisions of the Council on the matter which provide sanctions that do not impose direct obligations on natural and legal persons. An example of an EU secondary law act which, on the other hand, produces this type of effect is given by the Council Decision 2011/782/CFSP relating to restrictive measures against Syria and repealing the Decision 2011/273/CFSP (OJ 2011/L 319/56), which, inter alia, prohibits the sale of arms to Syria by "citizens of Member States (...)" (art.…”

EU strategic trade controls and sanctions: are we talking about the same thing?

“…However, the way to assess whether such objectives have been achieved remains unclear: how to determine, on a factual basis, whether human rights violations in a certain country have ended, or how to assess whether a specific country has ended its policy of internal repression. 71 The following standard paragraph is usually included in the Council document: the Decision "shall be kept under constant review. It shall be renewed or amended, as appropriate, if the Council deems that its objectives have not been met."…”