IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v57y2013i1p65-81.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coercion, Information, and the Success of Sanction Threats

Author

Listed:
  • Taehee Whang
  • Elena V. McLean
  • Douglas W. Kuberski

Abstract

This article explores when and why sanction threats succeed in extracting concessions from the targeted country. We focus on two different, albeit not mutually exclusive, mechanisms that can explain the success of sanction threats. The first mechanism relates to incomplete information regarding the sanctioner's determination to impose sanctions and suggests that threats help to extract concessions by revealing the sanctioner's resolve. The second mechanism underscores the direct impact of common interest between the two countries and explains the success of sanction threats by the targeted country's greater dependence on this link between the two countries and the sanctioner's ability to exploit this dependence. We test the hypotheses using a new strategic structural estimator. Our results provide no evidence in favor of the informational hypothesis, while lending robust support for the coercive hypothesis.

Suggested Citation

  • Taehee Whang & Elena V. McLean & Douglas W. Kuberski, 2013. "Coercion, Information, and the Success of Sanction Threats," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(1), pages 65-81, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:57:y:2013:i:1:p:65-81
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2012.00629.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2012.00629.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2012.00629.x?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Toke S. Aidt & Facundo Albornoz & Esther Hauk, 2019. "Foreign in influence and domestic policy: A survey," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1928, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    2. Morgan, T. Clifton & Kobayashi, Yoshiharu, 2021. "Talking to the hand: Bargaining, strategic interaction, and economic sanctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    3. Muhammet A Bas & Curtis S Signorino & Taehee Whang, 2014. "Knowing one’s future preferences: A correlated agent model with Bayesian updating," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 26(1), pages 3-34, January.
    4. Ricardo Hausmann & Ulrich Schetter & Muhammed A. Yildirim, 2022. "On the Design of Effective Sanctions: The Case of Bans on Exports to Russia," CID Working Papers 417, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    5. Roel Dom & Lionel Roger, 2018. "Economic sanctions and domestic debt: Burundi's fiscal response to the suspension of budget support," Discussion Papers 2018-12, University of Nottingham, CREDIT.
    6. Toke S. Aidt & Facundo Albornoz & Esther Hauk, 2021. "Foreign Influence and Domestic Policy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(2), pages 426-487, June.
    7. Yuleng Zeng, 2020. "Bluff to peace: How economic dependence promotes peace despite increasing deception and uncertainty," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(6), pages 633-654, November.
    8. Meyer, Klaus E. & Fang, Tony & Panibratov, Andrei Y. & Peng, Mike W. & Gaur, Ajai, 2023. "International business under sanctions," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 58(2).
    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. Menevis Cilizoglu & Navin A Bapat, 2020. "Economic coercion and the problem of sanctions-proofing," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(4), pages 385-408, July.
    11. Gustavo de Souza & Naiyuan Hu & Haishi Li & Yuan Mei, 2023. "(Trade) War and Peace: How to Impose International Trade Sanctions," CESifo Working Paper Series 10477, CESifo.
    12. T. Clifton Morgan & Navin Bapat & Yoshiharu Kobayashi, 2014. "Threat and imposition of economic sanctions 1945–2005: Updating the TIES dataset," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(5), pages 541-558, November.
    13. Tomas Sjostrom, 2023. "Optimal Compellance," Departmental Working Papers 202302, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
    14. Seitz, William & Presbitero, Andrea & Zazzaro, Alberto, 2017. "Sanctions and public opinion : the case of the Russia-Ukraine gas disputes," IDE Discussion Papers 652, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    15. Demena, B.A. & Benalcazar Jativa, G. & Reta, A.S. & Kimararungu, P.B. & van Bergeijk, P.A.G., 2021. "Does research on economic sanctions suffer from publication bias?," ISS Working Papers - General Series 674, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    16. Brekhov, Boris, 2019. "Economic Rewards versus Economic Sanctions in International Relations," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203599, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    17. Brandon J Kinne, 2014. "Does third-party trade reduce conflict? Credible signaling versus opportunity costs," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(1), pages 28-48, February.
    18. Gustavo de Souza & Naiyuan Hu & Haishi Li & Yuan Mei, 2022. "(Trade) War and Peace: How to Impose International Trade Sanctions," Working Paper Series WP 2022-49, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    19. Elena V McLean & Kaisa H Hinkkainen & Luis De la Calle & Navin A Bapat, 2018. "Economic sanctions and the dynamics of terrorist campaigns," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(4), pages 378-401, July.

    More about this item

    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:wly:amposc:v:57:y:2013:i:1:p:65-81. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    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.