Sanctions are coercive measures that can be applied to diplomatic, economic

and cultural relations between states, Rennack & Shuey (1999). Sanctions are
also defined as financial penalties imposed on a government, its authorities, or
private persons as a form of punishment or to offer disincentives for specific
policies and acts. Morgan et al (2009); Prinslow (2010) argue that sanctions are
a common tool for seeking to influence foreign governments and individuals to
change their behaviour. The primary objective of imposing sanctions is to deter
bad behaviour, enforcing economic punishment on the targeted country, to force
rehabilitation or changed behaviour by that country. There are several types of
sanctions namely: economic, diplomatic, military, sports, sanctions of
individuals and on the environment.
Economic sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe and its effects
Economic sanctions are commercial and financial penalties applied by one or
more countries against a targeted self-governing state, group or individual
(Tom.C, 2016). Economic sanctions are not only imposed because of economic
reasons but also social, political, military and social issues and also achieving
domestic and international purposes. Zimbabwe’s economy is battling for life
due to sanctions imposed by the United States of America (USA), United
Kingdom (UK), Australia, Canada and the European Union (EU). The four
main methods used by these governments to employ sanctions were:
 Blacklisting the target country
 Suspension of technical and aid assistance
 Trade controls
 Freezing financial assets.

After the enactment of ZIDERA in 2001, Zimbabwe faced a number of

sanctions. Its access to international credits was blocked therefore causing a
significant build up in financial debts and the country’s international
financial risk profile. Resultantly this led to the drying up of traditional
sources of external finance from the International Financial Institutions
(IFIs), with the country receiving no support from the African Development
Bank since 1998, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) since 1999 and the
World Bank since 2001. IFIs stopped their support to Zimbabwe by
instituting a number of suspensions on Balance of Payment support,
technical assistance, voting and related rights by the IMF, and declaration of
illegibility to access fund resources.
Agriculture was the main source of revenue in Zimbabwe’s economy,
however several key institutions with direct influence to the agricultural
sector were placed under sanctions. The unilateral sanctions made it
extremely difficult to access agriculture lines of credit and attract investment
hence lack of development, rehabilitation, modernisation and deterioration of
production and marketing infrastructure, ultimately reducing productivity
and access to markets. The well put manufacturing and processing industries
were severely affected as lack of investment and lines of credit made it
difficult for these industries to invest in better plant and machinery for
agriculture. The mining sector was negatively affected by the sanctions
resulting in loss of customers/clients as major corporations were unwilling to
deal with the minerals marketing companies. Moreover, due to limited
funding to recapitalize the industry it continued in failure as most financiers
stopped providing lines of credit to the industry. The energy infrastructure
dilapidated significantly since the imposition of sanctions due to decreased
Foreign Direct Investments and financial support from international financial
institutions like the World Bank.

The transport sector was adversely affected by the illegal punitive measures,
resulting in dilapidated aviation, road and rail sub-sectors. Air transport lost
almost 50% of traffic movements at its airports and airspace since the
imposition of sanctions. Furthermore, the movement of funds via the
International Air Transport Association (IATA) has been difficult resulting
in airlines failing to access their funds from ticket sales, thereby making it
difficult for airlines to do business in Zimbabwe. .Zimbabwe has been
falsely perceived as an unsafe and risky country to visit with the likes of the
UK, US, Germany and Australia issuing negative Travel Advisories to their
citizens reducing the number of tourist arrivals from the West with resort
towns such as Kariba being rendered ghost towns. Decline in international
partners, decline in room occupancy, volume of tourist arrivals and bookings
and revenues are some of the adverse effects of sanctions on tourism.

The average number of people employed in the formal sector was bigger
before the imposition of sanctions and that in the informal sector increased
significantly after the sanctions. Labour force surveys indicated that over
400,000 were at one point retrenched in the period 2005 to 2013 due to the
downsizing of operations and closure of companies particularly in the
manufacturing sector. The yearly average number of emigrants was 54.2%
and the average rose to 60.7% during the period after the imposition of
sanctions. This has further strained the human resource capacity to enable an
 increase in the pace of economic turn-around and development through brain
drain.

Numerous non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and international

cooperating partners have moved their operations out of Zimbabwe after the
imposition of sanctions ,terminating all projects in progress and retrenching
their employees. economic sanctions have significantly reduced the quality
and quantity of clean water. Furthermore, due to lack of access to nutritious
food and clean water, the average level of health of Zimbabweans has
significantly deteriorated. Simple and treatable diseases have become life-
threatening problems in Zimbabwe because of a perennial inadequate supply
of medicines and pharmaceutical equipment due to lack of support and
supply from other governments through economic sanctions.

Political Sanctions
Diplomatic sanctions are political measures taken to express disapproval or
displeasure at a certain action through diplomatic and political means. These
include limitations or cancellations of high-level government visits or expelling
or withdrawing diplomatic missions or staff. The main issue that is believed to
have triggered the imposition of such sanctions is the violence accompanying
the Land Reform Program in 2001 which resulted in deaths on farms ,
allegations of human rights and abuses on part of the government.. Chigora &
Dewa (2009) concluded that the ruling party and its allies that include war
veterans, youth militia and service chiefs were accused of fomenting
intimidation, arson, kidnapping and murder The above mentioned states
therefore then imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe in order to force politicians to
refine government policies in a way that would ensure Zimbabwe is ruled in a
democratic manner.
In 2001 the USA had imposed targeted sanctions against ZANU PF officials. In
2002 the EU then imposed sanctions against the ZANU PF regime which
comprised of an arms embargo including non-lethal equipment as well as a ban
on financial aid on any military related activity (Sims, Masamvu, & Mirell,
2010). According to Grebe (2010), ZANU PF retaliated with increased
repression especially towards the MDC who were labelled agents of the West.
The same sanctions which were supposed to coerce ZANU PF and aid
Zimbabwe towards a democratic path were used by ZANU PF to enact
extensive repressive laws in the name of sovereignty. In the Zimbabwean case
the sanctions gave ZANU PF pretext to enact repressive laws enabling
extensive control over the people with state resources such as the police and
army.
ZANU PF managed to manipulate some aspects of the economy to effectively
control, manipulate, segregate and garner support. Magaisa (2009) proposes that
the ZANU PF leadership and their position of power since independence of the
country, accumulated resources and control the country’s major industries. This
is supported by the evidence that individuals in the ZANU PF leadership
directly or indirectly own some of the largest companies in Zimbabwe
particularly after many of international companies left the country in 2002. In
the March 2008 presidential elections where presidential candidate from the
opposition party MDC Morgan Tsvangirai won but was prevented from taking
up the presidency resulted in an escalation of tensions between the ZANU PF
and MDC The aftermath of the elections was accompanied by violence which
resultantly led to a civil war and further tightening of sanctions which affected
the whole population. This rivalry between the opposition party and ZANU PF
still exists and causes a lot of difficulties in the ruling of the nation.

Conclusion
To a greater extent one can conclude that sanctions have a great contribution
towards Zimbabwe’s economic problems. It is important to note that the USA,
UK, Australia, Canada and EU, who are members of the World Trade
Organization (WTO), continue to impose economic sanctions on Zimbabwe.
Yet WTO’s main aim is to liberalize trade and one of the direct purposes of
economic sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe is to restrict trade, then therefore the
sanctions put Zimbabwean trade to a dead end. From an economist point of
view, a nation without trade is bound to fail. Economic sanctions have also
provoked the leaders to use the sanctions as an explanation for the lower levels
of growth and welfare, instead of failing economic policies, resulting in
increased corruption politically. However, to a lesser extent Zimbabwe is
responsible for its own economic failure for example it’s so called poor
governance which has led its economic performance to fail, through emigration
of economically active individuals, failure to be faithfully to its debts, just to
mention a few.
Moreover, one can conclude that politically, to a greater extent , Zimbabwe is
responsible for its own turmoil. The current government has been ruling since
1980 has done so using fear and condemnation making it nearly impossible to
have a supportive democratic political culture in Zimbabwe. The few political
parties that have managed to emerge and challenge the ZANU PF have been
removed using state resources from the police, judiciary and legislature The
constitution in Zimbabwe does promote multiparty competition and individual
rights however it is selectively enforced. There exists multiparty political
participation and competition but only to a certain level. Hence this doesn’t owe
to any of the sanctions employed by the West. One might actually suggest
actually assisted in the ease of political utterance that exists between the
competing parties
Reference List

Chipanga, C., & Mude, T. (2015). An Analysis of the Effectiveness of

Sanctions as a Law Enforcement Tool in International Law: A Case Study of
Zimbabwe from 2001 to 2013, Open Journal of Political Science, 5: 291 – 310.
Ferguson, A. (2000). “Zimbabwean Elections, 24 – 25 June 2000: Australian
Parliamentary Observer Mission”, The Zimbabwean Situation
IMPACT ON ZIMBABWE AND THE REGION OF THE UNILATERAL
SANCTIONS IMPOSED BY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE
EUROPEAN UNION
Kanyongo, D.E., 2016. Targeted sanctions as a new political discourse in
Zimbabwe: a transition or obstacle to democracy from 2000-2013 (Doctoral
dissertation).
Mararike, M. (2019). Zimbabwe Economic Sanctions and Post-Colonial
Hangover: A Critique of Zimbabwe Democracy Economic Recovery Act
(ZDERA) – 2001 a2018, International Journal of Social Science Studies, 7 (1):
28 – 39.
Ministry of Foreign affairs and International Trade ..,(15 October 2019)
Moyo S and Yeros P. (2007). ‘The Radicalized State: Zimbabwe's Interrupted
Revolution’, Review of African Political Economy, 34 (111), 103-121
Moyo S and Yeros P. (2009), ‘Zimbabwe Ten Years on: Results and prospects’,
Pambazuka, 419(56) 10 -33
Nyoni, T., 2019. The curse is real in Zimbabwe: economic sanctions must go!.
Prinslow, K. E. (2010). Economic Sanctions and Zimbabwe, US Army War
College, Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania.