Economic pressure has evolved from ancient trade restrictions into a global system of asset freezes, embargoes, financial penalties, and export controls
Sanctions are a form of nonmilitary pressure imposed by governments, groups of countries, or international bodies on a state, armed group, company, or individual. They restrict trade, financial transactions, travel, or access to technology in an effort to change behavior, deter prohibited conduct, or limit a target’s capabilities.
Governments now use sanctions as a central instrument of Middle East policy, particularly in relation to Iran, Yemen, Libya, Syria, and armed groups operating across the region.
The modern sanctions system is largely a product of the 20th century, but rulers employed trade restrictions and other forms of economic coercion thousands of years earlier.
One of the oldest surviving diplomatic agreements is the treaty between Ebla, a city-state in what is now northwestern Syria, and neighboring Abarsal, dating to about 2400–2350 BCE. The agreement regulated movement, supplies, and obligations between the two polities and prescribed penalties for violations. Although it would be anachronistic to describe the treaty as a modern sanctions regime, it shows that ancient rulers used economic restrictions and punitive measures to manage relations with neighboring states.
A clearer early example of an embargo dates to around 1230 BCE. Hittite King Tudhaliya IV ordered Shaushgamuwa, the ruler of the Hittite vassal kingdom of Amurru, to sever commercial ties with Assyria. Merchants from Amurru were barred from trading with Assyria, Assyrian merchants were to be denied passage through Amurru, and Assyrians who entered could be seized and handed over to the Hittite king.
Athens’ Megarian Decree of 432 BCE remains the best-known early Western example. It excluded Megarian merchants from Athenian markets and ports and became one of the disputes preceding the Peloponnesian War. States in the ancient Near East, though, had used coercive restrictions on trade and movement centuries earlier.
Today, sanctions may be imposed unilaterally by one country, collectively by groups such as the European Union, or multilaterally through the UN Security Council. Those imposing them generally present sanctions as a way to address war, terrorism, nuclear proliferation, human rights abuses, corruption, or violations of international law without immediately resorting to military force.
Common sanctions include:
- Asset freezes prevent a targeted person, company, or state entity from accessing money, property, or investments held within the jurisdiction imposing the measures. The assets normally remain the target’s property but cannot be moved, sold, or used without official authorization.
- Trade restrictions prohibit or limit the sale, purchase, or transfer of goods to or from a target. They may apply broadly or focus on specified products, such as weapons, oil equipment, software, advanced technology, or goods with both civilian and military uses.
- Export controls restrict the transfer of specified goods, software, or technology for national-security or foreign-policy reasons. Although often used alongside sanctions, export controls are generally administered under separate legal authorities.
- Financial sanctions limit access to banking services, loans, investments, insurance, payment systems, or foreign currency. They can make international business difficult even when the underlying trade is not formally prohibited.
- Travel bans prevent named individuals from entering or traveling through participating countries. They are often imposed on political leaders, military commanders, financiers, or members of armed groups.
- Arms embargoes prohibit the sale, supply, or transfer of weapons, ammunition, and related military equipment. They may also cover training, technical assistance, and financing connected to military activity.
- Shipping sanctions target vessels, cargoes, owners, operators, insurers, or port services involved in prohibited trade. They are commonly used to disrupt illicit oil exports, weapons transfers, or sanctions-evasion schemes.
- Secondary sanctions threaten penalties against foreign financial institutions, companies, or individuals that conduct specified business with a sanctioned target. They allow a country to exert influence beyond its own borders by forcing foreign businesses to choose between the sanctioned market and access to the sanctioning country’s economy.
The word “sanctions” can therefore describe very different measures. Some impose sweeping restrictions on a government or a major economic sector; others target a single commander, company, ship, or financier.
Primary sanctions generally govern the conduct of people and companies within the sanctioning country’s jurisdiction. US primary sanctions, for example, commonly prohibit US citizens, residents, companies, and financial institutions from conducting specified transactions. Secondary sanctions target certain conduct by foreign parties even when no US person is directly involved.
Iran is subject to the Middle East’s most extensive current sanctions regime. The US maintains broad restrictions related to Iran’s nuclear and missile activities, support for armed groups, human rights abuses, petroleum trade, military procurement, and other conduct.
On Aug. 24, the US Treasury Department expanded the Iranian economic sectors covered by Executive Order 13902 to include aviation, digital assets, gold, shipping, and technology. The action did not create an entirely new Iran sanctions system. It broadened the categories of activity that can expose people and businesses to designation or secondary-sanctions risk.
The European Union maintains separate sanctions connected to Iran’s nuclear proliferation activities, human rights violations, military support for Russia’s war against Ukraine, support for armed groups in the Middle East and Red Sea region, and threats to freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.
Yemen is not subject to a comprehensive UN embargo. UN measures focus on designated people and entities judged to threaten the country’s peace, security, or stability. They include asset freezes, travel bans, and a targeted arms embargo.
Libya remains subject to a separate UN framework that includes an arms embargo, asset freezes, and travel bans. The Security Council has also authorized measures against vessels involved in illicit exports of Libyan crude oil and other petroleum products.
US policy toward Syria shifted substantially in 2025. President Trump revoked the comprehensive Syria sanctions program, but Washington retained targeted authorities covering members and associates of the former Assad government, human rights abusers, Captagon traffickers, terrorist organizations, people linked to chemical-weapons or proliferation activities, and others considered threats to Syria or its neighbors.
Elsewhere in the region, sanctions are generally narrower. US measures concerning Lebanon and Iraq tend to target particular people, companies, or networks accused of corruption, terrorism financing, destabilizing conduct, or other threats to security rather than either country’s economy as a whole.
Middle Eastern governments also use economic coercion against neighboring states and rivals.
The 2017–2021 blockade of Qatar was a prominent recent example. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Egypt severed diplomatic relations and sharply restricted transport and commercial ties with Qatar, accusing it of supporting terrorism and interfering in other countries’ affairs. Qatar denied the accusations.
Qatar initially faced disrupted supply routes and travel but developed alternatives through Turkey, Iran, and new shipping arrangements. The blockade ended in January 2021 without Qatar publicly accepting the full list of demands originally presented by the four countries.
Regional economic pressure is often less formal than US, EU, or UN sanctions. It may involve border closures, airspace restrictions, boycotts, banking constraints, trade restrictions, or pressure on companies not to deal with a particular state or organization. A coercive economic measure does not have to carry the formal label “sanction” to produce similar effects.
Sanctions can raise the cost of prohibited conduct, restrict access to money or technology, isolate key individuals, and create incentives for negotiation. They tend to exert greater pressure when major economies act together and the target depends on them for finance, trade, military equipment, or essential imports.
Measures are less reliable when the objective is regime change, the reversal of a deeply rooted security policy, or the collapse of a determined government. Targets may find alternative buyers, employ intermediaries, expand smuggling, draw on reserves, or shift the economic burden onto their populations. Governments may also blame foreign sanctions for economic failures caused partly by their own policies.
Sanctions can impose humanitarian costs even when food, medicine, and humanitarian assistance are formally exempt. Banks and suppliers may refuse otherwise lawful transactions because they fear inadvertently violating complex rules or suffering legal and reputational consequences. This practice, often called overcompliance or derisking, can impede humanitarian work and access to essential goods, particularly in countries already affected by war, institutional collapse, or economic mismanagement.
Whether sanctions work depends less on their severity alone than on the objective, international cooperation, enforcement, available exemptions, and the target’s ability to replace lost markets and financial relationships.
