Tesla Universe on how U.S. sanctions on Huawei unleashed a wave of innovation

The resilience of companies previously seen as vulnerable to sanctions has surprised many.  Huawei, once thought to be in decline after restrictions cut off its access to key technology made a dramatic comeback in 2023 by unveiling the Mate 60 Pro.  This smartphone, powered by an advanced, domestically produced 7 nanometer processor, caught industry experts off guard.  Many believe that China's ability to innovate had been stifled by sanctions, yet Huawei's success told a different story.  The company has also built next-generation networking equipment using entirely local components, reinforcing its ability to navigate external pressures.  Rather than acting as barriers, trade restrictions have fueled advancements by forcing Chinese firms to develop alternative technologies.

[...]

Texas Instruments, a major supplier of analog semiconductors reported a revenue shortfall of $2.3 billion due to reduced demand from Chinese buyers.

[...]

For years, these [U.S. semiconductor] firms generated up to 30% of their revenue from China.  With demand shrinking, new concerns have emerged over whether these policies [tariffs and sanctions] are backfiring.  China's share of global semiconductor production has surged.  In 2020, it accounted for around 15% of the world's total output.  By 2023, that figure climbed to nearly 30%.

[...]

China's influence extends beyond chip manufacturing.  Domestically-produced processors are now powering critical infrastructure, including data centers, telecommunications networks and artificial intelligence platforms.  Major companies are replacing imported components with locally-developed alternatives, reshaping the supply chain.  By 2023, over 60% of China's cloud computing industry was running on homegrown technology, demonstrating the shift away from foreign providers.

~ "China SHOCKING Tech Breakthrough: Did U.S. Sanctions Backfire?," Tesla Universe, March 17, 2025

Huawei Mate 60 Pro

Cyrus Janssen on trade with developing countries

Just last year, China announced it would have zero tariffs for all developing countries around the world, cementing its position as the trading leader for the Global South.  Meanwhile, the United States currently has sanctions on one-third of the global economy, including 60% of all poor countries.  If I'm a developing country looking who to trade with, it's a no-brainer: China is the clear partner.

~ Cyrus Janssen, "Harvard Economist Reveals Shocking Secret About Trade War with China," Cyrus Janssen, 3:15 mark, February 9, 2025

Ryan McMaken on the political logic of sanctions

The idea behind sanctions has long been to make the population suffer so that "the people" will revolt against the ruling regime and force it to cease the policies that the sanction-imposing regimes find objectionable.  In many cases, the stated goal is regime change.  It's essentially the same philosophy behind Allied efforts to bomb German civilians during World War II: it was assumed the bombing would ruin civilians' morale and lead to domestic demands that Berlin surrender. 

Economic sanctions are less despicable than bombers targeting civilians, of course, but they are also likely less effective.  Instead of convincing the domestic population to abandon their own regime, foreign attacks on civilians—whether military or economic—often cause the domestic population to double down on their opposition to foreign powers.

~ Ryan McMaken, "Why Sanctions Don't Work, and Why They Mostly Hurt Ordinary People," Mises.org, March 9, 2022

Kevin Duffy responds to Roger Waters interview about Israel-Palestine conflict

You had me hanging on every word (in agreement) until you got to the word "profit."  This is a strange criticism coming from a man who has profited handsomely from the free market.  What were the means to those millions you and your band mates earned in profit?  It wasn't through violence.  You didn't screw anybody.  In fact, you served millions of consumers.  Your fans (myself included) were happy to hand over a few of their hard earned dollars for a record album or concert ticket.  In return we were not only treated to incredible music, but lyrics that touched deep emotions and got us to think critically.  Pink Floyd became part of the soundtrack and conscience of our lives.  What is that worth?  There's a lesson here: Trade is not exploitation, it is win-win. 

Trade is also the key to the Israelis and Palestinians ending their century long blood feud.  Israel imposed a blockade on Gaza in 2006, cutting off the mutually beneficial economic bonds that tie people together, especially people who hate each other.  That blockade is nothing more than an act of war, hitting civilians the hardest.  The West Bank Palestinians, led by Omar Barghouti, responded with their own boycotts and sanctions (the BDS movement). While some of their efforts are targeted and justified (e.g., against Boeing selling weapons to the Israelis), they run the risk of declaring economic war on Israeli civilians AS WELL AS their own people.

What is the result of these trade wars?  Those in power - Hamas, the Palestinian Authority, the Netanyahu administration - get stronger as their people suffer under crushing sanctions which create the ideal external enemy.  Foreign aid only makes matters worse, being syphoned off by the political class and further subverting the free market. 

There is an ironclad law of economics: Where goods are not allowed to cross borders, armies will.  Gaza and the West Bank are just the latest in a long, tragic list of examples.

~ Kevin Duffy, reply to TRT World interview of Roger Waters, December 9, 2023

Osama bin Laden on U.S. sanctions on Iraq

You have starved the Muslims of Iraq, where children die every day.  It is a wonder that more than 1.5 million Iraqi children have died as a result of your sanctions, and you did not show concern.  Yet when 3000 of your people died, the entire world rises and has not yet sat down.

~ Osama bin Laden, "Letter to the American People," November 2002

Tom Woods on the World War I blockade against Germany

Think back to World War I, when the Allies continued their starvation blockade of Germany for four months after that country surrendered.  Estimates of the consequences of that policy range from 750,000 to 1 million German civilians dead from hunger.

Within a generation, as you will recall, a rather distasteful political party emerged there, whose members, generally young, remembered having nearly been starved to death as children.  Resentment over past injustices has been a powerful and destructive force in recent history.

~ Thomas E. Woods, Jr., "Lift U.S. Sanctions: They Choke The Tyrannized More Than The Tyrants," Investor's Business Daily, March 19, 2001

Tom Woods on sanctions on Iraq and inevitable reprisals "in the form of terrorist attacks" (2001)

In general, a policy of sanctions hurts only the civilian population, leaving the government more or less untouched.

If anything, sanctions may even tend to strengthen popular support for the government inasmuch as the leader can now portray himself and his nation as the besieged victims of a vindictive U.S.

Especially disconcerting about the Clinton-Albright policy [of sanctions on Iraq] was its blithe disregard of any long-term consequences for the U.S. essentially starving a helpless country to death.

Set aside the morality of the question for a moment, as Clinton and Albright did, and think only of U.S. interests.  The Gulf War has been over for 10 years, and American students still can't distinguish Baghdad from Wagga Wagga on a map.  But do you suppose the Iraqi people have forgotten, or ever will?

If the U.S. continues on its present course, it is next to impossible to imagine that we can forever avoid the terrible reprisals, in the form of terrorist attacks - nuclear, chemical or otherwise - that our policy makes almost inevitable.

~ Thomas E. Woods, Jr., "Lift U.S. Sanctions: They Choke The Tyrannized More Than The Tyrants," Investor's Business Daily, March 19, 2001

Pascal Canfin on EU's energy and Russia strategy

Our strategy is working, and that's very good news.  First leg: economic sanctions.  The economic impact on Russia is much worse than the impact of the sanctions on energy, on our own economy.  It's not perfect on us... but the situation in Russia is much worse than that...  Second leg: military.  Of course, support to Ukraine.  And it works...  But of course it has impact on us as well and we knew that from the very beginning...

[...]

For peak hours, it's putting the pressure on households - not with a policeman in their bedroom, of course -  but putting the pressure on households collectively, saying, "ok, if you have to put your washing machine on, then do it at 5 AM and not at 7, or not at 8 PM..."  Second, we need to cap the revenues - and that's a taxation issue - we need to cap the revenues of electricity and oil and gas companies...  Cap revenue on electricity generation companies in order to get the rents to the member states so that we can invest in solidarity to handle the social consequences and to invest in green energies.  Plus, let's say call it tax, it's one of levy on oil excess profits...  We are in an exceptional situation.  They have excess profits...  We cannot keep that rent untouched.  We will get it, part of it..., and it will be redistributed both on social aspects... and to invest in green technology...

[...]

[The Green Deal] is more than ever alive and more than ever the solution and not the problem.  More renewables means less dependence from Russia, mean less emission.  More efficiency, more investment in green technologies.  All of that is good for the climate, it's good for the Green Deal, it's good for independence from a political point of view.

~ Pascal Canfin, European Parliament Member, Bloomberg TV interview, September 14, 2022

Michael Rozeff on economic sanctions

Sanctions are wrong for the same reason that dropping a hydrogen bomb on Moscow would be wrong.  They target innocent people.  They are wrong for the same reason that attacking the Taliban government in Afghanistan was wrong, when bin Laden was the accused.  They are wrong for the same reason that attacking Iraq was wrong when Saddam Hussein was the accused target.  They are wrong for the same reason that bombing Libya was wrong when Gaddafi was the accused target.

~ Michael Rozeff, "The Theory of Economic Sanctions is Wrong," LewRockwell.com, March 14, 2014

(Quoted by Lew Rockwell, "Keep US Out of War," February 28, 2022.)

Jen Psaki on imposing trade sanctions against Xinjiang, China

We believe the private sector and the international community should oppose PR- — the PRC’s weaponizing of its markets to stifle support for human rights. 

We also think that American companies should never feel the need to apologize for standing up for fundamental human rights or opposing repression. 

As we’ve said before, we call on all industries to ensure that they are not sourcing products that involve forced labor, invol- — including forced labor from Xinjiang.

~ Jen Psaki, Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki, December 23, 2021

(President Biden signed the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act earlier that day.)

Madeleine Albright on U.S.-led sanctions against Iraq

Lesley Stahl: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.

~ Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, 60 Minutes, May 12, 1996

(Albright made no attempt to deny the figure given by Stahl--a rough rendering of the preliminary estimate in a 1995 U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) report that 567,000 Iraqi children under the age of five had died as a result of the sanctions.)