IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/eeupol/v27y2026i1p60-87.html

International sanctions and domestic backlash. Exploring public support towards the EU's rule of law enforcement

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Blauberger
  • Soso Makaradze
  • Gabriele Spilker

Abstract

Does communicating sanctions change how they are perceived by citizens in the target country? In this paper, we argue that not only sanction design, but also the framing of international sanctions and their endorsement by political actors can increase citizens’ support for sanctions. We test this argument in the case of the European Union and using conjoint experiments in Hungary, Poland, and Bulgaria. Our results show that both framing and cueing seem to matter in addition to the question of how sanctions are designed. While it is important for public support that procedural fairness is incorporated in designing the sanctions, framing sanctions in terms of protecting the rule of law and obtaining support from the domestic opposition seems to matter just as much.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Blauberger & Soso Makaradze & Gabriele Spilker, 2026. "International sanctions and domestic backlash. Exploring public support towards the EU's rule of law enforcement," European Union Politics, , vol. 27(1), pages 60-87, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:27:y:2026:i:1:p:60-87
    DOI: 10.1177/14651165251395302
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14651165251395302
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/14651165251395302?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dursun Peksen, 2019. "When Do Imposed Economic Sanctions Work? A Critical Review of the Sanctions Effectiveness Literature," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(6), pages 635-647, September.
    2. Stéphanie Novak, 2013. "The Silence of Ministers: Consensus and Blame Avoidance in the Council of the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(6), pages 1091-1107, November.
    3. Hana Attia & Julia Grauvogel, 2023. "International Sanctions Termination, 1990–2018: Introducing the IST dataset," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 60(4), pages 709-719, July.
    4. Kaemfer, William H & Lowenberg, Anton D, 1988. "The Theory of International Economic Sanctions: A Public Choice Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(4), pages 786-793, September.
    5. Sonja Priebus & Lisa H. Anders, 2024. "Fundamental Change Beneath the Surface: The Supranationalisation of Rule of Law Protection in the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(1), pages 224-241, January.
    6. Hainmueller, Jens & Hopkins, Daniel J. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2014. "Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-30, January.
    7. Omer Zarpli, 2023. "Sanctions and target public opinion: Experimental evidence from Turkey," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(3), pages 424-453, May.
    8. Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Jeffrey J. Schott & Kimberly Ann Elliott, 2007. "Economic Sanctions Reconsidered, 3rd edition (hardcover)," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 4075, January.
    9. William Seitz & Alberto Zazzaro, 2020. "Sanctions and public opinion: The case of the Russia-Ukraine gas disputes," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 817-843, October.
    10. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara B. & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring Subgroup Preferences in Conjoint Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 207-221, April.
    11. Gabriele Spilker & Thomas Bernauer & Víctor Umaña, 2018. "What Kinds of Trade Liberalization Agreements Do People in Developing Countries Want?," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(3), pages 510-536, May.
    12. Julia Gray & Raymond P. Hicks, 2014. "Reputations, Perceptions, and International Economic Agreements," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(3), pages 325-349, May.
    13. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring subgroup preferences in conjoint experiments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100944, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Mikhail A Alexseev & Henry E Hale, 2020. "Crimea come what may: Do economic sanctions backfire politically?," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(2), pages 344-359, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Katharina Meissner, 2023. "How to sanction international wrongdoing? The design of EU restrictive measures," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 61-85, January.
    2. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    3. E. Keith Smith & Dennis Kolcava & Thomas Bernauer, 2024. "Stringent sustainability regulations for global supply chains are supported across middle-income democracies," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.
    4. Jerg Gutmann & Matthias Neuenkirch & Florian Neumeier, 2024. "Political Economy of International Sanctions," Research Papers in Economics 2024-07, University of Trier, Department of Economics.
    5. Tukiainen, Janne & Blesse, Sebastian & Bohne, Albrecht & Giuffrida, Leonardo M. & Jääskeläinen, Jan & Luukinen, Ari & Sieppi, Antti, 2024. "What are the priorities of bureaucrats? Evidence from conjoint experiments with procurement officials," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    6. Fumiya Uchikoshi & Hirofumi Miwa & Yoshikuni Ono, 2025. "Gendered Expectations for College Applications: Experimental Evidence from a Gender Inegalitarian Education Context," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 66(5), pages 1-27, August.
    7. Lindgren, Oskar & Jagers, Sverker C. & Lindvall, Daniel, 2026. "The impact of policy design on opposition to restrictive climate policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    8. Sayaka Usui & Benjamin K. Blevins, 2025. "Investing in the Future of Djibouti: A Choice-based Conjoint Analysis for Youth Employment Preferences," SAGE Open, , vol. 15(1), pages 21582440251, March.
    9. Michael J. Frith, 2021. "Analysing conjoint experiments in Stata: the conjoint command," London Stata Conference 2021 14, Stata Users Group.
    10. Avidit Acharya & Jens Hainmueller & Yiqing Xu, 2026. "Learning Preferences from Conjoint Data: A Structural Deep Learning Approach," Papers 2604.10845, arXiv.org, revised May 2026.
    11. Kim, Sung Eun & Park, Jong Hee & Rhee, Inbok & Yang, Joonseok, 2025. "What do aid recipients want? Public attitudes toward foreign aid in developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    12. Liza G. Steele & Laird Gallagher, 2025. "Attitudes Toward Immigrants and Refugees During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the U.S," Journal of International Migration and Integration, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 2593-2627, December.
    13. Jaroslaw Kantorowicz & Elena Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, 2026. "What matters to people when we sanction states? A conjoint experiment," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 43(2), pages 209-222, March.
    14. Ruprecht, Sophie & Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle, 2025. "Going solar? The role of knowledge in shaping social acceptance of citizen-financed PV projects in Switzerland," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    15. Chu, Haoran & Liu, Sixiao, 2021. "Light at the end of the tunnel: Influence of vaccine availability and vaccination intention on people’s consideration of the COVID-19 vaccine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    16. Hsu Yumin Wang & Stefano Jud & Will Giles, 2025. "Does shaming make non-compliance with international court rulings costlier? Evidence from China," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 62(7), pages 2445-2453, December.
    17. Rudolph, Lukas & Freitag, Markus & Thurner, Paul, 2021. "The Comparative Legitimacy of Arms Exports - A Conjoint Experiment in Germany and France," SocArXiv r73pv, Center for Open Science.
    18. Lim, Sijeong & Dolsak, Nives & Prakash, Aseem & Tanaka, Seiki, 2022. "Distributional concerns and public opinion: EV subsidies in the U.S. and Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    19. Yang Liu & Wei Lang & Aihua Wang, 2025. "Are financial sanctions truly “smart”? Evidence from the perspective of cross‐border capital flows," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(2), pages 1671-1688, April.
    20. Ahlback, Johan & Yeandle, Alexander, 2025. "What drives public trust in elections? Experimental evidence from Malawi," OSF Preprints xhuz5_v1, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:27:y:2026:i:1:p:60-87. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.