Sanctions

Freedom of opinion and expression, academic freedom, even freedom of conviction and belief are in grave danger when governments adopt chauvinistic legislation that demonizes other nations and cultures and pretends to divide the world into “democracies” and “autocracies”, into the “good guys” and the “bad guys”.  This kind of epistemological Manichaeism encompasses what we call “exceptionalism”, with its brazen double standards.  The US sets the rules, the so-called “rules-based international order”, which it applies arbitrarily, notwithstanding the existing order established in the United Nations Charter.

This epistemological chaos is aggravated when criminal legislation is adopted that criminalizes dissent, even in social media, even in private exchanges. Over the past thirty years we have witnessed a steady exacerbation of Russophobic and Sinophobic tendencies that have been instrumentalized by governments to fan the flames of hatred and increase the cacophony of the drums of war.  The logic of fanaticism has its own dynamic, as hatred feeds on hatred.

Fear-mongering and hate-mongering has been used to justify provocations and ultimately the use of force, both militarily and in the form of unilateral coercive measures UCMs, wrongly referred to as “sanctions”.  Here again we find ourselves caught in the web of our own propaganda and ready-made prejudices.  We put labels on our perceived rivals, and call them undemocratic, dictators, tyrants, murderers.  We misuse the term “sanctions”, because we want to convey the impression that we possess the moral or legal authority to punish other States, individuals, and enterprises.  We behave as prosecutors, judges and juries.

According to international law, only the Security Council possesses the authority to impose sanctions.  Everything else entails the illegal “use of force”, specifically prohibited in article 2 (4) of the UN Charter.