EU and UK Sanctions Policies After Brexit: Divergent Allies? The Case Study of Belarus
The departure of the United Kingdom from the European Union signified a new stage in their relations. The emergence of the UK as an autonomous sanctions actor has taken place in parallel with the world’s backsliding in autocracy, human rights violations and armed conflicts. This article compares the...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2024
|
| In: |
European journal on criminal policy and research
Year: 2024, Volume: 30, Issue: 2, Pages: 277-299 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Keywords: |
| Summary: | The departure of the United Kingdom from the European Union signified a new stage in their relations. The emergence of the UK as an autonomous sanctions actor has taken place in parallel with the world’s backsliding in autocracy, human rights violations and armed conflicts. This article compares the EU’s and the UK’s newly-emerged sanctions policies on a case study of Belarus to find out to what extent they diverge if at all, exploring them on political, economic and legal grounds. As to the ‘how’ question, the article delves into a quantitative approach looking at a timeline, a number and a scope of designations; for the ‘why’ question the article identifies the overall sanctions goals pursued by each of the parties taken from the classification of Francesco Giumelli as ‘coercive’, ‘constraining’ or ‘signalling’. The main conclusion of this article is that while the overall foreign policy principles are synchronised, the form and content of sanctions diverge. The EU and the UK perceived the salience of foreign policy events in Belarus differently, which resulted in divergent sanctions responses and therefore the goals of the sanctions. Despite the UK’s more robust sanctions implementation and enforcement toolkit emerging after Brexit, the EU took leadership in the Belarus sanctions design. They did converge however in prioritising each main export commodity in granting licenses. This conclusion contributes to the discussion of the neighbouring countries’ alignment with the EU’s sanctions. It suggests delving deeper into the EU's heightened expectations regarding the alignment of other countries. The article argues that the leadership in sanctions is not ‘static’ by virtue of the appeal of the norms of the European Union but more dynamic - passing in the hands of those who create more innovative tools of sanctions design and implementations. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1572-9869 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s10610-024-09584-y |