Sanctions are not a humane alternative to war

"In international diplomacy, economic sanctions are often portrayed as a clean and humane alternative to war, a supposedly civilised way to pressure governments into compliance with international law without shedding blood. Yet this reassuring narrative hides a devastating truth: sanctions can destroy the health and wellbeing of ordinary people. While they are intended to weaken regimes, they often end up crippling the targeted state's ability to provide basic healthcare to the very citizens those measures claim to protect."

"Our recent correspondence in The Lancet examines this reality in the context of the United Nations Security Council's decision on September 28, 2025, to reimpose multilateral sanctions on Iran. In the piece, we do not take a position on the Security Council's decision to reimpose multilateral sanctions; rather, our focus is squarely on the potential consequences of this move for Iran's population, particularly given the severe health impacts seen under previous sanctions."

Sanctions are often portrayed as a humane alternative to war but can destroy the health and wellbeing of ordinary people. Sanctions intended to weaken regimes frequently cripple state capacity to provide basic healthcare and access to medicines. Safeguards and humanitarian mechanisms commonly collapse, leaving vulnerable populations exposed to political decisions made far from their reach. Evidence from Iran before 2015 shows severe impacts on the health system, including shattered infrastructure and measurable losses in population health. The 2025 reimposition of multilateral sanctions on Iran risks repeating these harms. Sanctions therefore operate as de facto public health interventions with deadly consequences.

Read at www.aljazeera.com