Over 60% of sanctions imposed on countries fail:Urjit Patel questions the West’s favourite weapon, explains why it often backfires

By the turn of the 21st century, sanctions had replaced wars as the preferred instrument of global power. They promised punishment without bloodshed, morality without missiles. But as Urjit Patel argues in The Great Sanctions Hack, this faith in sanctions masks a deeper paradox: the more they are used, the less effective they become. Between 2000 and 2023, sanctions were most frequently imposed not in response to war or territorial aggression, but in the name of human rights (274 cases) and democracy (218 cases). Since 1949, 1,547 sanctions have been imposed on countries worldwide. Of these, 589 were imposed by the United States alone. By contrast, only 12 sanctions have ever targeted the US, mostly symbolic measures by Russia, China and Iran. This asymmetry reveals the truth that sanctions are not a neutral global instrument, they are a hegemonic privilege.
Sanctions impact investments even without involvement Few examples capture the real-world costs of sanctions better than Iran’s Chabahar port – a project that belonged to India. Game of narrative too Sanctions do not operate only through laws and banks; they are reinforced through narratives. As Urjit Patel provocatively asks: When was the last time an analyst based in a sanctions-hit country was interviewed by the BBC or CNN? The absence is telling. On the eve of the 16th BRICS Summit in Kazan on 22 October 2024, the BBC’s designated expert was not a Russian, Chinese or Iranian scholar – but an academic based in Ireland. This pattern matters. When voices from sanctioned countries are systematically excluded, sanctions appear cleaner, simpler, and more justified than they really are. Do sanctions serve the motive? One of the least discussed aspects of sanctions is their bureaucratic inertia. Once imposed, they often outlive their purpose. US sanctions on Nigeria imposed in 2003 are still in force. EU sanctions on Moldova continue years after their initial rationale faded. These cases reflect either a failure to admit futility, unrealistic expectations of success, or simple forgetfulness. The irony is stark. The average success rate of sanctions is only about 40%. In any other policy domain, such a failure rate would prompt reassessment. Instead, sanctions have proliferated. If something does not work, logic dictates less of it, not more. Sanctions defy this logic.

Then, why sanctions fail? One reason sanctions increasingly fail is the changing structure of the global economy. Urjit Patel suggests a few points here – In 2025, the US imposed tariffs on India for purchasing Russian oil, accusing it of indirectly supporting Russia’s economy. Yet larger importers—China, Turkey and even the EU—were spared. Why?
China’s leverage over the rare earth ecosystem limits Washington’s room for manoeuvre. Turkey and the EU benefit from strategic overlap with NATO. Sanctions, it turns out, are not about rules—they are about leverage. This explains why, despite Washington’s desire to pressure China, it cannot act entirely at will.
When Sanctions Backfire Perhaps the most consequential insight from The Great Sanctions Hack is that sanctions often ‘strengthen’ the forces they aim to weaken. Let’s take the US as a sanctioner and China as a sanctiond country. About the book
The Great Sanctions Hack by former RBI Governor Urjit Patel examines how economic sanctions have become a dominant tool of global power, often used disproportionately by the West. The book is divided into seven chapters and spans 146 pages. However, if you are looking for a storytelling chronicle, this may not be the best pick. It is not a light read, rather, it is mentally demanding, with a fair amount of mathematics and formulas. Those interested in economics and geopolitics should definitely pick it up. The book has been published by Rupa Publications.