A Classic Despite Its Errors? Evaluating Johan Galtung’s Seminal Sanction Study

Abstract Johan Galtung’s article on economic coercion remains a classic contribution 60 years after its publication, despite its contentious evaluation of the sanctions against the supremacist regime of Rhodesian Prime Minister Ian Smith. This review essay argues that the enduring impact of the World Politics (1967) study arises from its theoretically rich and measured appraisal of economic statecraft, which continues to enhance sanctions research and seemingly reaffirms the anti-interventionist biases found in parts of both the political left and right. I examine some of the numerous hypotheses presented in Galtung’s case study and empirically evaluate whether his pessimistic view of coercive measures has withstood the test of time. To achieve this, I compare the effectiveness of economic sanctions from 1949 to 2023. The analysis indicates that the limited success of sanctions during the Cold War may partially explain Galtung’s nuanced negativity. My discussion of recent research also supports his central hypothesis that coercive actions by multilateral organizations are more effective than unilateral sanctions. This poses negative implications for the United States and other countries, increasingly adopting a cavalier seul strategy in this and other areas.