“Sanctions are instruments of power in the world market. They do not fall on states as such; they are transmitted through prices, access to credit, logistics, and insurance, ending up as lower real wages and higher reproduction costs for the popular classes. In this sense, snapback is a coercive economic act that subordinates a semi-peripheral economy to the security priorities of the core. It invites us to ask: who pays, who decides, and who benefits?
“Iran’s claim to sovereign control over peaceful nuclear technology is legitimate. The selective use of international law by powerful states is obvious: their allies’ arsenals are tolerated; their adversaries face blockade. The E3’s language of “non-performance” and the U.S. call for compliance reflect this asymmetry of force—and this is why many inside and outside Iran see the move as imperial overreach, not neutral rule-enforcement.
“Sanctions are class policy by other means—but so are the Islamic Republic’s own policies.”
Comments