People and countries have used boycotts and sanctions throughout history to further their social and political agendas. Klein, Smith, and John (2004, p. 93) define boycotting as the act of ceasing social or commercial ties with a person, group, or nation as a form of retribution or political protest. Therefore, a boycott can be used as a tool by parties who appear to be more powerful but are actually more weak against groups that are more powerful but smaller (Klein, Smith, and John (2004, p.95). The concept of boycott is often studied in the context of labour relations and history. Sanctions on the other hand refers to a broad range of punitive measures and reactions that are adopted unilaterally or by a collection of states against one or more perpetrators of an act that is otherwise deemed to be internationally unlawful to ensure compliance, respect, and performance of a given obligation, right or duty (Decaux 2008). Sanctions may be centralized, within an elaborate institutional framework or adopt a decentralized framework (Decaux 2008, p.249). In this paper, the pros and cons of boycotts and sanctions within the framework of national and international contexts are explored. Advantages of Boycotts According to Klein, Smith, and John (2004, p. 92), there are several benefits of consumer boycotts. Before exploring the benefits of consumer boycotts, it is important to explore the motivation of consumers to engage in boycotts. The first factor is that boycotts reflect a boycotter’s desire to effectively communicate a specific message to the target company and to pressure the organizations to change their policy and behaviour. The willingness of consumers to engage in boycotts is mainly influenced by the general belief that they work. The exaggerated belief in their effectiveness may be the main motivating factor for participating in boycotts. The willingness of consumers to take part in boycotts may also be influenced by their perceptions of the seriousness of the specific situation. Research also indicates that the other factor that influences consumer or citizen participation in boycotts is self-enhancement (Klein, Smith, and John (2004, p.100). Boycotters are claimed to be influenced by their need to gain self-esteem. To understand the importance of boycotts, it is imperative to analyze them in the context of social movements. Boycotts as Forms of Social Movements Social movements can be defined as a complicated set of numerous actions by a number of different collective actors who are focusing on some very wide objective or issue (Goodwin and Jasper, 2009). Such activities affect every individual as those involved respond to the actions they have seen from others. For instance, people can copy what happened in the protest cycle of the 1960s into the present social movements (Goodwin and Jasper, 2009). This idea of social movement is directly related to the widespread recognition of cycles and collective conflict. In social movement, certain activities affect other activities. The influence of the protest cycle of the 1960s on the social movements of today can also be explained through the process of “tactical diffusion." This has made previous social movements to spill over to the present social movements. "Tactical diffusion" is important to the evolution of protest actions since is distributed actions across time or space.
Therefore, the protest cycle of the 1960s has been distributed over time or space, thus providing a better view of how the previous protests have influenced the present ones. Cycles of social movements came from inflationary spiral protest groups when this period battled for supremacy and increasingly radical activities were required to obtain disruptive impact (Tilly and Wood 2013). The battle for supremacy was carried forward to the current social movements where the leaders have been giving out power to the coming generation. Their rules are also not maintained with some necessary changes being made with the increased developments. The youth movements of the early 1960s have played an important role in modern social lives. Many young adults and children nowadays spend more time in school and are more affluent than the previous generation, leading to a faster transition from childhood to adulthood in the modern days. In the early years, only 20% of the Americans graduated from high school and most of the teenagers were full-time workers. In the recent time, however, nearly 75% of the students graduated from high school showing a massive increment in the modern social life (Tilly and Wood 2013). The modern colleges and universities have teamed up with students to solve the social injustices created by the past regimes and students have an obligation and freedom to question the moral and spiritual health of the nation which could not have happened in the past. The civil rights movement of the 1960s headed by Martin Luther King Jr, which originated among the black Americans, has a great impact on modern day protests and boycott actions (Goodwin and Jasper 2009). The black Americans were to sit in the back of public buses while the white sat on the forefront. The blacks were racially discriminated and segregated to the extent that they could not share restaurants, hotels, schools or rooms with the whites. The blacks were paid poorly and employments were hard to come by. However, the movement brought an end to all these injustices and currently, people are treated equally. America has tried to reduce the racial discrimination and segregation, thus paving way for free and democratic nation for all the citizens. The 1965 bill passed by the Congress in 1965 suspended the Voting Rights Act that was used to disqualify blacks from voting in a national election hence giving the right to every citizen to participate in an election.
Disadvantages of Boycotts Boycotts have been noted to lead to a financial ruin of the targeted companies. Even though sociologists and political science theorists have long opined that boycotts are successful tools for stimulating social and political change, they failed to appreciate the economic implications of boycotts. The reducing level of boycott action’s effectiveness has been reported by Werner (2017), who noted the emerging trend of diminishing effectiveness of boycott actions nationwide. He attributed this trend to an increasingly polarized world in which divided opinions are entertained by those on opposing sides of corporate or government policy. Sanctions As noted earlier, sanctions refer to a broad range of punitive measures and reactions that are adopted unilaterally or by a collection of states against one or more perpetrators of an act that is otherwise deemed to be internationally unlawful to ensure compliance with, respect for as well as performance of a given obligation, right or duty. Advantage of sanctions There are several advantages of imposing economic sanctions on a given nation. For instance, when used against economically unsound dictatorial regimes, they may achieve their goals of creating a more favourable environment for the affected economies or nations (Decaux 2008). Economic sanctions may also affect the attitudes and minds of citizens of affected nations who may then become rebellious of their dictatorial regime. Economic sanctions have been linked to the need to promote democracy and global security.
Disadvantages of Sanctions Some countries like Russia and China may not support the concept of sanctions. The arms race has seen the US and the international community advocate for sanctions against countries with nuclear ambitions like North Korea (Torbati 2017). The main problem with sanctions is their political nature. The US and the EU have endeavoured to increase their pressure on Russia by including some more names in their arrangements of people endorsed. What the World Can Do if Sanctions Fail Under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), each nation has a right to nuclear advancement for tranquil purposes such as nuclear vitality (Torbati 2017). The dread is that nations may utilize this as an aide for weapons advancement. In a general sense, if capable nations, for example, the US itself, are seeking after nuclear weapons choices while resisting different nuclear restraint arrangements the whole time raises contentions that numerous have made previously. For example, other nations have a right to create nuclear weapons. Why does just a couple of capable nations have them? Will they utilize their position to weight or spook different nations to their diversions? North Korea, India, Pakistan, and Israel, for instance, would appear to specifically or by implication help these inquiries for their own particular investment. The right to nuclear weapons will be an alluring contention for the individuals who feel debilitated by the current world forces, or for those with more aspiration. Moreover, the world's preeminent nuclear forces seem unwilling to give sufficient help. Some, for example, the US, seem to invest and create more weapons, referring to reasons, for example, fear and doubt of others. In that sense, it would be difficult to contend against different nations additionally requesting such frightful weapons. The US may even discover it will need to acknowledge that others will need nuclear weapons as well, as they will reuse these same concerns, regularly back towards the US, including the charge of deception if the US contradicts them. Analysis of “The Global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement” Article In the article, “The Global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement,” addresses the history of the BDS movement. The main aim of the movement was to come up with plans on how it would isolate Israel because of the fact that the country supported racism (Jamjoum, 2011). The BDS forum attempted all they could to influence the international community to isolate the country through the use of comprehensive sanctions and boycotts (Jamjoum, 2011). The country was likened to the Apartheid South Africa and it was therefore called upon for the country to change or be isolated from the international relations. Aims of the BDS Movement The primary main of the BDS movement states was to enhance the activities carried out by the BDS against the Israel State. That is, the country was being pressured to comply with the Palestinian rights and the international law (Jamjoum, 2011). The aim was just a part of the entire strategy that aimed at isolating the Israel for it to transform to a pariah state. The realization of these objectives was however met with challenges, with one being that it was not compatible with a two-state solution that recognized the right of self-determination of both parties (Jamjoum, 2011). For instance, if the demand that the descendants of the refugees were allowed to go back to Israel, then there would have been an Arab majority in the country (Jamjoum, 2011). However, since Israel is a democratic state, having a demographic shift would bring along some adverse consequences, such as bringing to an end the Jewish state in the country as well as its role as a safe haven for the Jewish people (Jamjoum, 2011). In the article, it is also clear that despite the gains attributed to the BDS movements, they are still considered as fringe movements in some countries such as the USA. For instance, it is indicated that the European Union, as well as the U.S government, has rejected boycotts associated with Israel (Jamjoum, 2011). Some states such as Florida, Illinois, and New York among others have also come up with legislations that have prohibited the and also rejected activities conducted by BDS (Jamjoum, 2011). Some of the reasons why great organizations reject such Boycotts is because of the economic ties between these countries (Jamjoum, 2011).
Analysis of the “From distinction to Boycotts: NGO language in UN Security Council Resolution 2334,” Article According to the article, “From distinction to Boycotts: NGO language in UN Security Council Resolution 2334,” the resolution 2334 was adopted by the UN Security Council in the year 2016 on 23rd December (SPME, 2017). The article addresses the language embraced by the NGOs funded by the European organizations to enhance campaigns against the Apartheid nature of the State of Israel (SPME, 2017). The Resolution 2334 calls for the need of the countries to come up with a clear distinction between the territories of Israel and other relevant dealings. The strategy evolved through a series of milestones with the first one being on May in the year 2012. In this event, the NGOs published a report, “Trading Away Peace: How Europe Helps Sustain Illegal settlements in Israel,” which advocated for strategies to advance the BDS incrementally (SPME, 2017). For instance, it was required that the products from the settlements be labelled to prevent their purchase. It was also required banning of financial settlements among other activities related to the settlements (SPME, 2017). Among other events, the primary aim of the resolution was to ensure that there exists a clear distinction between relevant dealings between the territories occupied since the year 1967 and the territory of the State of Israel. Conclusion Sanctions and boycotts serve a noble function of enhancing transparency, accountability, and safety in a dynamic global community.
Despite their advantages and disadvantages, politics is what complicates their very nature. The political nature of sanctions and politics makes them subjective and the loss of objectivity is what makes both concepts ineffective. Ultimately, what the world needs is more inclusion and negotiation to foster peace and understanding. Sanctions and boycotts are effective, however; governments and boycotters must ensure that they maintain objectivity when crafting their actions.
☝Useful info: Boost your academic standing with our premier Сapstone project writing service—your gateway to excellence.
References
Decaux, E. (2008). The definition of traditional sanctions: their scope and characteristics. Public Law at the University Panthe´on-Assas Paris II. International Review of The Red Cross. 90 (870) 249-257 Goodwin, J., and Jasper, J. M. (2009). The social movements reader: Cases and concepts. Chichester, U.K: Wiley-Blackwell. Klein, J. G., Smith, N. C., and John, A. (2004). Why we boycott: Consumer motivations for boycott participation. Journal of Marketing, 68: 92–109. Torbati, Y (2017). U.S. Sanctions More, Including Russians, Over North Korea Arms.Retrieved Saturday, 7th, 2017, from http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-sanctions-northkorea-idUSKBN18S5N9 Tilly, C., and Wood, L. J. (2013). Social movements, 1768-2012. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers. Werner, T (2017). The Emerging Downside of Consumer Boycotts.Texas Perspectives. Retrieved Saturday, 7th, 2017, from https://news.utexas.edu/2017/05/15/the-emerging-downside-of-consumer-boycotts Jamjoum, H., 2011. The global campaign for boycott, divestment, and sanctions against Israel. In Nonviolent resistance in the second intifada (pp. 133-151). Palgrave Macmillan US. SPME (2017). From Distinction to Boycotts: NGO Language in UN Security Council Resolution 2334 - Anti BDS, BDS News, Boycotts, Divestments and Sanctions (BDS) - SPME Scholars for Peace in the Middle East. SPME. Retrieved 3 July 2017, from http://spme.org/boycotts-divestments-sanctions-bds/boycotts-divestments-and-sanctions-bds-news/anti-bds/distinction-boycotts-ngo-language-un-security-council-resolution-2334/23625/
