Takunkumin tattalin arziki
 Takunkumin tattalin arziki | |
|---|---|
| Bayanai | |
| Ƙaramin ɓangare na |
sanction (en)  da trade conflict (en) |
| Fuskar |
trade war (en) |
Takunkumin tattalin arziki ko takunkumin kasuwanci ne da na kudi da jihohi ko cibiyoyi ke amfani da su a kan jihohi, kungiyoyi, ko mutane.[1] Takunkumin tattalin arziki wani nau'i ne na tilasta wanda ke ƙoƙarin sa ɗan wasan kwaikwayo ya canza halayensa ta hanyar rushewa a musayar tattalin arziki. Ana iya yin hukunci don tilasta (ƙoƙarin canza halayyar ɗan wasan kwaikwayo) ko hanawa (ƙoƙari na dakatar da ɗan wasan kwaikwayo daga wasu ayyuka). [2][3]
Sanctions na iya yin niyya ga dukan ƙasa ko kuma ana iya yin niyyar su ga mutane ko kungiyoyi; wannan nau'in takunkumi na ƙarshe ana kiransa "ƙaddamarwa mai hankali".[4] Hanyoyin takunkumin tattalin arziki sun haɗa da shingen kasuwanci, daskarewa, haramtacciyar tafiye-tafiye, takunkumin makamai, da ƙuntatawa kan ma'amaloli na kuɗi.
Ingancin takunkumi wajen cimma burin da aka nufa batun muhawara ne.[1][2][3][4][5] Masana sun kuma yi la'akari da manufofin waje na takunkumi.[5][6] Sakamakon jin kai na takunkumin kasar ya kasance batun jayayya.[7] A sakamakon haka, tun daga tsakiyar shekarun 1990, takunkumin Majalisar Tsaro ta Majalisar Dinkin Duniya (UNSC) ya kasance yana da niyya ga mutane da ƙungiyoyi, ya bambanta da takunkumin ƙasar na shekarun da suka gabata.[8]
Tarihin takunkumi
[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]Ɗaya daga cikin yunkurin da aka yi a kan takunkumi ya faru ne a lokacin Yaƙe-yaƙe na Napoleon na 1803-1815. Da yake da niyyar gurgunta Burtaniya a tattalin arziki, Sarkin sarakuna Napoleon I na Faransa a cikin 1806 ya gabatar da Tsarin Continental - wanda ya hana kasashen Turai kasuwanci tare da Burtaniya. A aikace Daular Faransa ba za ta iya aiwatar da takunkumin gaba ɗaya ba, wanda ya zama mai cutarwa (idan ba haka ba) ga ƙasashen nahiyar da ke da hannu kamar na Burtaniya.[9] A lokacin Yarjejeniyar Hague ta 1899 da 1907, jami'an diflomasiyya da malaman shari'a sun tattauna akai-akai ta amfani da matsin tattalin arziki don aiwatar da dokar kasa da kasa. An kuma haɗa wannan ra'ayin a cikin shawarwarin sake fasalin da lauyoyin Latin Amurka da na kasar Sin suka yi a cikin shekarun da suka kai ga Yaƙin Duniya na I.
Yaƙin Duniya na I da lokacin Interwar
[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]Sanctions a cikin nau'ikan toshewa sun kasance sanannun a lokacin Yaƙin Duniya na I. Tattaunawar game da aiwatar da takunkumi ta hanyar kungiyoyin kasa da kasa, kamar League of Nations, sun zama sanannun bayan karshen yakin duniya na . [10] Shugabannin sun ga takunkumi a matsayin madadin da ya dace da yaki.[11]
Alkawarin League ya ba da izinin amfani da takunkumi a lokuta biyar:
- Lokacin da aka keta Mataki na 10 na Alkawarin Kungiyar
- Idan akwai yaki ko barazanar yaki (Mataki na 11)
- Lokacin da memba na League bai biya Kyautar sasantawa ba (Mataki na 12)
- Lokacin da memba na League ya tafi yaƙi ba tare da gabatar da takaddamar ga Majalisar League ko Majalisar League ba (Mataki 12-15)
- Lokacin da wanda ba memba ba ya yaƙi da memba na League (Mataki na 17)
Rikicin Abyssinia a cikin 1935 ya haifar da takunkumin League a kan Italiya ta Mussolini a karkashin Mataki na 16 na Alkawari. Duk da haka, ba a dakatar da samar da man fetur ba, kuma Suez Canal ya rufe zuwa Italiya, kuma nasarar ta ci gaba. An ɗaga takunkumin a 1936 kuma Italiya ta bar League a 1937.
A cikin jagorancin harin Japan a kan Pearl Harbor a 1941, Amurka ta sanya takunkumin kasuwanci mai tsanani a kan Japan don hana ci gaba da cin nasarar Japan a Gabashin Asiya.[11]
Daga Yaƙin Duniya na II zuwa gaba
[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]Bayan Yaƙin Duniya na II, Ƙungiyar ta maye gurbin Ƙungiyar ta Ƙungiyar Majalisar Dinkin Duniya (UN) a cikin 1945. A duk lokacin Yaƙin Cold, amfani da takunkumi ya karu a hankali.[11] Bayan karshen Yakin Cold, an sami karuwar takunkumin tattalin arziki.[7]
Dangane da Bayanan Bayanan Sanctions na Duniya, an sami takunkumi 1,325 a cikin shekarun 1950-2022.[11]
Siyasa na takunkumi
[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]Ana amfani da takunkumin tattalin arziki a matsayin kayan aiki na Manufofin kasashen waje ta gwamnatoci da yawa. Yawancin lokaci babbar ƙasa ce ke sanya takunkumin tattalin arziki a kan karamar ƙasa saboda ɗaya daga cikin dalilai biyu: ko dai wannan ƙarshen yana da barazana ga tsaron tsohuwar al'umma ko kuma ƙasar tana bi da 'yan ƙasa ba bisa ka'ida ba. Ana iya amfani da su azaman matakai na tilastawa don cimma takamaiman manufofi da suka shafi kasuwanci ko don cin zarafin jin kai. Ana amfani da takunkumin tattalin arziki a matsayin madadin makami maimakon zuwa yaki don cimma sakamakon da ake so.
Cibiyar Bayanai ta Duniya ta rarraba manufofi tara na takunkumi: "canja manufofi, rushe gwamnatoci, warware rikice-rikicen yankuna, yaki da ta'addanci, hana yaki, kawo karshen yaki, maidowa da inganta haƙƙin ɗan adam, maido da inganta dimokuradiyya, da sauran manufofi".[11]
Tasirin takunkumin tattalin arziki
[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]Dangane da binciken da Neuenkirch da Neumeier suka yi, takunkumin tattalin arzikin Majalisar Dinkin Duniya ya yi tasiri sosai a kan jihohin da aka yi niyya ta hanyar rage ci gaban GDP da matsakaicin 2.3-3.5% a kowace shekara - kuma fiye da 5% a kowace shekara idan ya shafi cikakkun takunkumin Majalisar Dinkinobho - tare da mummunan tasirin da ke ci gaba na tsawon shekaru goma. Sabanin haka, takunkumin Amurka na gefe ɗaya yana da ƙaramin tasiri a kan ci gaban GDP, yana ƙuntata shi da 0.5-0.9% a kowace shekara, tare da matsakaicin tsawon shekaru bakwai.[12]
Oryoie, AR ya nuna cewa takunkumin tattalin arziki yana haifar da asarar jin dadin dukkan kungiyoyin samun kudin shiga a Iran, tare da kungiyoyi masu arziki da ke fama da asarar da ta fi girma idan aka kwatanta da kungiyoyi marasa talauci.[13]
Tsayar da takunkumi a kan abokin adawar yana shafar tattalin arzikin kasar da ke da iko har zuwa digiri. Idan an gabatar da ƙuntatawa na shigo da kayayyaki, masu amfani a cikin ƙasar da ke da iko na iya ƙuntata zaɓin kayayyaki. Idan an sanya takunkumin fitarwa ko kuma idan takunkumin ya hana kamfanoni a cikin ƙasar da ke tilasta kasuwanci tare da ƙasar da aka yi niyya, ƙasar da ke da iko na iya rasa kasuwanni da damar saka hannun jari ga ƙasashe masu fafatawa.[14]
Hufbauer, Schott, da Elliot (2008) suna jayayya cewa Canjin mulkin shine mafi yawan manufofin manufofin kasashen waje na takunkumin tattalin arziki, wanda ya kai sama da kashi 39 cikin dari na shari'o'in da aka tilasta su. Hufbauer et al. sun gano cewa kashi 34 cikin 100 na shari'o'in da aka yi nazari sun yi nasara. Koyaya, lokacin da Robert A. Pape ya bincika binciken su, ya gano cewa kawai 5 daga cikin nasarorin da suka samu 40 ne kawai suka kasance masu tasiri, suna rage yawan nasarar zuwa 4%.[15] A kowane hali, wahalar da ba zato ba tsammani na auna ainihin nasarar takunkumi dangane da burinsu suna ƙara bayyana kuma har yanzu suna cikin muhawara. A wasu kalmomi, yana da wahala a tantance dalilin me ya sa mulkin ko ƙasa ke canzawa (watau, ko sanarwa ne ko rashin kwanciyar hankali) kuma sau biyu don auna cikakken tasirin siyasa na wani mataki da aka ba shi.
Bayar da bayani game da dalilin da ya sa ake sanya takunkumi har yanzu ko da lokacin da suke da tasiri sosai, jami'in diflomasiyyar Burtaniya Jeremy Greenstock ya ba da shawarar takunkumi sun shahara ba saboda an san su da tasiri ba, amma saboda "babu wani abu da za a yi tsakanin kalmomi da aikin soja idan kuna so ku kawo matsin lamba ga gwamnati". Masu sukar takunkumi kamar lauyan Belgium Marc Bossuyt suna jayayya cewa a cikin gwamnatocin da ba na dimokuradiyya ba, ana kalubalantar yadda wannan ke shafar sakamakon siyasa, saboda ta hanyar ma'anar irin waɗannan gwamnatocin ba sa amsawa da karfi ga sha'awar jama'a[16]
Manazarta
[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]- 1 2 Sue E. Invalid
|url-status=Biersteker(help); Missing or empty|title=(help) Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name ":4" defined multiple times with different content - 1 2 Drezner, Daniel W. (2003). "The Hidden Hand of Economic Coercion". International Organization. 57 (3): 643–659. doi:10.1017/S0020818303573052. ISSN 0020-8183. JSTOR 3594840. S2CID 154827129. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name ":5" defined multiple times with different content - 1 2 Pape, Robert A. (1997). "Why Economic Sanctions Do Not Work". International Security. 22 (2): 90–136. doi:10.2307/2539368. ISSN 0162-2889. JSTOR 2539368. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name ":8" defined multiple times with different content - 1 2 Drezner, Daniel W. (2011). "Sanctions Sometimes Smart: Targeted Sanctions in Theory and Practice". International Studies Review. 13 (1): 96–108. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2486.2010.01001.x. ISSN 1521-9488. JSTOR 23016144. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name ":9" defined multiple times with different content - 1 2 Drezner, Daniel W. (2024). "Global Economic Sanctions". Annual Review of Political Science (in Turanci). 27 (1): 9–24. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-032240. ISSN 1094-2939.
- ↑ Farrell, Henry; Newman, Abraham L. (2019). "Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion". International Security. 44 (1): 42–79. doi:10.1162/isec_a_00351. ISSN 0162-2889. S2CID 198952367.
- 1 2 Drezner, Daniel W. (2022). "How not to sanction" (PDF). International Affairs (in Turanci). 98 (5): 1533–1552. doi:10.1093/ia/iiac065. ISSN 0020-5850. Archived from the original on 9 December 2022. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name ":10" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ Giumelli, Francesco (November 2015). "Understanding United Nations targeted sanctions: an empirical analysis". International Affairs. Oxford University Press. 91 (6): 1351–1368. doi:10.1111/1468-2346.12448.
- ↑ "Continental System Napoleon British Embargo Napoleon's 1812". Archived from the original on 10 July 2011.
- ↑ Potter, Pitman B. (1922). "Sanctions and Guaranties in International Organization". American Political Science Review (in Turanci). 16 (2): 297–303. doi:10.2307/1943965. ISSN 0003-0554. JSTOR 1943965. S2CID 143600305.
- 1 2 3 4 5 Morgan, T. Clifton; Syropoulos, Constantinos; Yotov, Yoto V. (2023). "Economic Sanctions: Evolution, Consequences, and Challenges". Journal of Economic Perspectives (in Turanci). 37 (1): 3–29. doi:10.1257/jep.37.1.3. ISSN 0895-3309. S2CID 256661026 Check
|s2cid=value (help). Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name ":11" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ Neuenkirch, Matthias; Neumeier, Florian (1 December 2015). "The impact of UN and US economic sanctions on GDP growth" (PDF). European Journal of Political Economy. 40: 110–125. doi:10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2015.09.001. ISSN 0176-2680.
- ↑ Oryoie, Ali Reza (6 June 2024). "The impact of international sanctions on income mobility: Evidence from Iran". Review of Development Economics (in Turanci). 28 (4): 1695–1717. doi:10.1111/rode.13123. ISSN 1363-6669.
- ↑ Griswold, Daniel (27 November 2000). "Going Alone on Economic Sanctions Hurts U.S. More than Foes". Cato.org. Archived from the original on 23 September 2011. Retrieved 30 March 2015.
- ↑
Pape, Robert A. (Summer 1998). "Why Economic Sanctions Still Do Not Work". International Security. 23 (1): 66–77. doi:10.1162/isec.23.1.66. JSTOR 2539263. S2CID 57565095.
I examined the 40 claimed successes and found that only 5 stand up. Eighteen were actually settled by either direct or indirect use of force; in 8 cases there is no evidence that the target state made the demanded concessions; 6 do not qualify as instances of economic sanctions, and 3 are indeterminate. If I am right, then sanctions have succeeded in only 5 of 115 attempts, and thus there is no sound basis for even qualified optimism about the effects of sanctions.
- ↑ Capdevila, Gustavo (18 August 2000). "United Nations: US Riled by Economic Sanctions Report". Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. Retrieved 20 June 2020.