EU SANCTIONS : THREE CASES

7 A regional organization, such as the Eu. Using sanctions, is limited in its global reach. In contrast,
international actors, such as the UN, have worldwide mandate. Thus, effective implementation
strategies must include an increased investment in cooperation and settle political difference
both among the sender countries as well as with and within theregion surrounding the target. In
the case of Zimbabwe, regional organizations were involved in the sanctions but were not
coordinated and lacked fundamental infrasctructure, which affected the whole sanctions policy.
Also, in the case of Burma, regional cooperation was lacking.

8 The background motivations for placing individuals on lists should be made available: this
probably increases the credibilitiy of the policy as it becomes more transparent. In terms of
listing individuals, efforts must be placed on clarity issues. Efforts must be made to ensure that
complete lists are available to the implementers. Also, by providing background documents
describing the purposes of the sanctions, as well as the procedure underlying the choice of
sanctions, the general public could easier identify themselves with the sanctions. This could
greatly increase, although not necessarily guarantee, the effectiveness of the sanctions within
the receiver state, on the sender state and in the international area.

9 Goals that are set up in the various sanctions programs are often very abstract. Hence, before
implementing sanctions, it is important to assess the target in order to draw up concrete and
achievable goals. An assessment should be based on realistic conditions upon which the
sanctions could build. It should contain clear goals, clear ideas on how to effectively monitor
sanctions, how the sender could help and supply other states in sustaining the sanctions, etc.
The assessment should be made so that the stated objectives are archieved in the best possible
way. By doing this, the sender minimizes the risk of not achieving what was intended, which in
turn increases the legitimacy of the sanctions. Unless sanctions are made concrete, senders may
not fully implement them and this will help the receiver to circumvent the sanctions. With clear
goals, clear monitoring standards follow. None of the reviewed sanctions cases seemed to have
clear monitoring instruments.

10 EU procedures for bringing about a sanctions program could be seen as politically and legally
very complex. This creates problems in several areas: quick decisions may be hindered,
difficulties in division of responsibility, different management of sanctions cases, difficulties in
explaining to an audience why the sanctions were enforced and how they work. By creating a
simpler sanctions infrastructure within the EU’s decision-making branches, sanctions policies
would be more accurate and monitored in the long run. In concerte terms, this means that there
should be a sanctions unit, which on a daily basis informs key agencies, organizations, banks,
airport, etc. on both an EU and a national level, on the latest developments-in terms of changing
positions, changing regualitons, changing legislation-relating to the target.