Economic wars and economic sanctions
The economic wars of the XIX-XXI centuries, in which trade, sea, credit blockades, arrests and confiscations of property are used, in the overwhelming majority of cases pursue political goals. By pursuing an aggressive foreign policy towards the periphery of world capitalism, the West avoids the term “economic war”, preferring such neutral definitions as “economic sanctions”, “trade and economic restrictions”, “moratorium”, “ban”. However, all these measures in aggregate are designed to undermine the economy of the adversary, to cause social unrest, to change the government in the state. The combination of economic sanctions imposed by the West against Russia in the 2014 year is in the exact sense of the word economic war.
Among the economic wars of the past, we can recall the “continental blockade”. This is a set of measures to block UK trade, conducted by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1806-1814. Napoleon managed to connect most of the continental European states to the blockade of the British Isles. In general, in the XIX century the most common type of economic war was the naval blockade. In the period 1827-1914. 21 was subjected to blockade: Turkey, Portugal, the Netherlands, Colombia, Panama, Mexico, Argentina and El Salvador. The initiators of the blockades were the United Kingdom (12 times), France (11 times), Italy, Germany (3 times), Austria and Russia (2 times) and Chile.
Economic wars and economic sanctions of the twentieth century
Table. 1.
The dynamics of economic sanctions in the twentieth century.
Years (five-year intervals)
The number of cases of sanctions
1911-1915
1
1916-1920
2
1921-1925
2
1926-1930
0
1931-1935
3
1936-1940
3
1941-1945
1
1946-1950
8
1951-1955
5
1956-1960
10
1961-1965
15
1966-1970
4
1971-1975
13
1976-1980
25
1981-1985
15
1986-1990
20
1991-1995
34
1996-2000
13
Source: Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Jeffrey J. Schott, Kimberly Ann Elliott, and Barbara Oegg. Economic Sanctions Reconsidered, 3rd edition. November 2007.
Economic sanctions became an important and often used tool of international politics only after the Second World War, especially in the last three decades of the twentieth century. For the period 1971-2000. there were 120 cases of sanctions, which amounted to 69% of all cases recorded in the period 1911-2000.
In the twentieth century, the economic war of the West against the USSR was the most ambitious. This war had clearly expressed political goals - the shift of power of the Bolsheviks, the drive to power of henchmen of the Entente countries (first of all, Great Britain and France), a change in the country's course. In addition, the West sought Russia's fulfillment of debt obligations, as well as the restoration of property rights of foreigners (the abolition of the nationalization of foreign assets). The economic war against Soviet Russia began on December 1917, when the former allies of Russia on Entente declared a trade and sea blockade to it. With small interruptions (primarily during the Second World War), the economic war against the Soviet state continued until the collapse of the USSR in December 1991. The economic war of the West against the Soviet Union, supplemented by the information-psychological war and the operations of the special services, was an integral part of the cold war against the socialist camp.
Economic sanctions and economic war against Russia after 1991
It is impossible to agree with the statement that the West did not lead an economic war against the Russian Federation after the collapse of the USSR. Regarding the Russian Federation, the US continued to have amendments to the trade law of Vanik-Jackson, adopted in 1974 in order to force Moscow to lift restrictions on Jews leaving the USSR. The amendments provided for various restrictions in terms of both export and import trade with the Soviet Union. The amendments were repealed only in 2012, but they were immediately replaced by the Magnitsky Act. This law reserves the right of the government and the US president to impose restrictions on trade with the Russian Federation.
Another example is restrictions on technology supplies. Back in 1949, on Washington's initiative, an international organization called the Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls, better known as COCOM, was created. During the Cold War, COCOM compiled lists of strategic goods and technologies that could not be exported to the Eastern Bloc countries. The Committee developed a strategy of "controlled technological backwardness" for the Warsaw Pact countries. The Berlin Wall fell, the Soviet Union fell, but COCOM continued to exist. It was liquidated only in 1994, but it was replaced by the Wassenaar Arrangement. It made it possible to no less effectively limit the flow of military and dual-use technologies from Western countries to "undesirable" countries. That is, only the signs changed, but the essence of the West's policy towards the new Russia remained the same as towards the Soviet Union. The Russian Federation was the object of an economic war.
Until recently, there were no particular external manifestations of this war against Russia for two reasons.
First, at the first stage of its existence, the Russian Federation voluntarily walked in the wake of Western policy, it became an object of such a policy from a subject of international politics and did not require any coercive actions towards it. The West had a wide arsenal of methods of economic warfare, but in the 1990s it was used extremely rarely.
Secondly, some measures of the West are not formally related to the economic war. But this is only formal. For example, in the summer of 2014, the International Court of Justice in The Hague issued a verdict about the claim of “offended” foreign investors of the Russian oil company Yukos. He ordered the Russian Federation to pay the plaintiffs compensation in 50 billion dollars. The court decision is clearly political motivation. Investors' claim was in court for many years, but it was “shot” in 2014 year. The decision was made in the midst of the crisis in Ukraine, when the West had already introduced a series of sanctions against Russia, and was supposed to increase the effect of official US and EU sanctions.
Under sanctions - half the world
Russia is not the only object of the economic war of the West. According to UN estimates, at the beginning of the 21st century, the economic sanctions of the United States and other countries of the “golden billion” acted against dozens of countries in the world where 52% of the world's population live. The most protracted is the economic war of Washington against Cuba and North Korea. The sanctions against Cuba were introduced in 1960, when rebels led by Fidel Castro expropriated the property of American citizens and companies on the island; in 1962, the sanctions were tightened to the level of the embargo and since then they continue to operate almost without relief. According to the authorities of Cuba, the direct damage from the embargo for more than half a century was about 1 trillion dollars. However, Washington never achieved its main goal - regime change in Cuba.
A long economic war has also been waged against Iran. US sanctions against this country were introduced in 1979 year. Since then, they have not been canceled, only their set has changed. Even after negotiations with Iran on its nuclear program began, the blockade with Iran was not completely lifted, easing was symbolic. The war against Iran continues.
Arsenal of methods of economic warfare in the XXI century
At the beginning of the XXI century, the arsenal of means of economic war expanded considerably.
First, it is the economic sanctions officially announced by government departments. Such sanctions may apply to all citizens and all economic entities of another country (companies, banks, other organizations), and may be sectoral. As, for example, the anti-Russian sanctions announced in the summer of 2014 against three sectors - military production, oil production, the banking sector. In some cases, sanctions can be targeted (in this case, special blacklists are drawn up). Sanctions can be primary and secondary. The first case is actions against citizens and economic entities of the country that is subject to sanctions, the second is actions against citizens, companies and banks of other countries that contribute to the violation of sanctions. For example, many banks in Western Europe and the United States today are being charged by courts and financial oversight bodies for participating in international payments and settlements in favor of banks and companies from Iran, Libya, Syria, Cuba, Sudan (against which the United States and some countries Europe announced sanctions). At the same time, banks that have fallen under such secondary sanctions today are subject to fines, measured in billions of dollars.
Sanctions can concern commodity flows (export and import), transport communications, movement of labor, financial flows. A particularly destructive effect can be caused by such a sanction as blocking operations of banks through the SWIFT communication system. Although SWIFT is an international organization of a private nature (most of the founders are banks from different countries), however, it can be strongly pressured by government agencies of the United States and its allies in Europe. In 2012, under strong pressure from outside, SWIFT (a system formally in the jurisdiction of Belgium) was forced to block the operations of Iranian banks.
Extremely destructive effect can have such a sanction, as the freezing of the foreign exchange reserves of the country “outcast”. Precedents have already been. For example, the United States arrested at one time the reserves of Iran (the exact amount is unknown). In 2011, the reserves of the Central Bank and the Libyan sovereign fund were arrested (total assets arrested were 150 billion dollars).
With a strong promotion of the flywheel of an economic war, arrests, confiscations and nationalization of foreign assets owned by private companies and banks can occur. Thus, in the period of the rise of the national liberation movement in Asia, Africa and Latin America in 1960, a large number of cases of nationalization of the assets of transnational corporations operating in these countries were recorded.
Secondly, to the means of economic warfare should be attributed actions that are not formally associated with the political motives that are used to declare sanctions. A vivid example is the manipulation of commodity and financial markets. The countries initiating an economic war (primarily the United States and the United Kingdom), based on the capabilities of their banks, can artificially raise and lower prices on commodity markets, interest rates on financial markets, exchange rates on money markets, etc. At the same time, everything can be blamed on the "element of the market" or on the "greedy speculators." The current drop in oil prices is a blow to the Russian economy, but formally it is difficult to tie it to the war that is unleashed against Russia. Rating agencies shamelessly lower the quotations of Russian securities to the level of “junk”, but at the same time, the agencies pretend that their ratings are “independent”.
A powerful informal tool of economic war against Russia can be the American FATKA law (the law on taxation of foreign accounts), adopted in order to ensure complete collection of taxes to the US treasury. The United States Revenue Service plans this year to require all banks outside of America to provide information about customers who have tax obligations to the US treasury. Under the cover of the struggle to increase tax collection, the US government is making an unprecedented attempt to put foreign banks under its direct administrative control. Russian banks are no exception. Since the United States is waging an undeclared economic war against Russia, such control over Russian banks is likely to be used for the economic destabilization of Russia.
Today, Russia must be armed with all the wealth of experience in modern economic wars. Two issues deserve special attention: the effectiveness of sanctions and measures to counter them. About this - in the next article.
Economic sanctions are a set of measures of pressure on the state to achieve predominantly political goals, but although sanctions lead to negative consequences in the economy of the sanctioned state, the final political goals are not always achieved. Most often they are not achieved at all. According to the well-known American expert in this field, Gary Khafbauer and his co-authors, who classified the 204 case of sanctions, they achieved success in only about a third of cases (Table 1).
Table. 1.
The objectives of economic sanctions and their performance
Goal
Number of cases
Success rate
Moderate policy modification
43
51
Regime change or democratization
80
31
Cessation of hostilities
19
21
Destruction of military potential
29
31
Other significant policy changes.
33
30
Source: Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Jeffrey J. Schott, Kimberly Ann Elliott, and Barbara Oegg. Economic Sanctions Reconsidered, 3rd edition. November 2007.
In many cases, economic sanctions have a stimulating, mobilizing effect on the economies of the countries being sanctioned. Thus, the continental blockade, which Napoleon Bonopart organized against Britain, gave impetus to the second phase of the industrial revolution in Great Britain, and contributed to its final transformation into a “workshop of the world”. By the way, Napoleon managed to connect Russia to the continental blockade for some time, insisting on stopping supplies to England of grain, wood, flax, fur and fur goods, etc. At the same time, Russia was forced to abandon imports from England of industrial products, including iron and textiles. Specialists in Economic stories note that it was Russia's participation in the continental blockade that gave impetus to the development of the Russian ferrous metallurgy (ironworks) and the textile industry.
A classic example of the ineffectiveness of sanctions is the case of imposing an embargo on trade with Italy by the League of Nations at the end of 1935. The initiator of the sanctions was the United Kingdom, and the reason for their announcement was the invasion of Italy in Abyssinia (Ethiopia). The embargo was ineffective. First, Italy’s trade continued with those countries that were not part of the League of Nations (first of all, it was Nazi Germany). Secondly, even those countries that voted for sanctions against Italy did not follow them too strictly.
An impressive example of the mobilizing effect of economic sanctions is the Soviet Union. Already in the first months after the Bolsheviks came to power, the Entente countries organized a sea and trade blockade against Soviet Russia. In the blockade ring, the country's leadership gradually matured a decision on the need to build an economy that would be minimally dependent on foreign markets. In December, 1925 was the slogan of socialist industrialization. Four more years passed, the first five-year plan was launched, which laid the foundation for the heavy industry of the Soviet Union. Before the beginning of World War II, more than 9 of thousands of industrial enterprises were built, the country managed to prepare for aggression from fascist Germany. The share of imports in meeting the internal needs of the USSR in terms of both the means of production and consumer goods fell to about 2%. Over the years 10-12 a grand import substitution program has been implemented.
After World War II, one of the directions of the West's Cold War against the USSR was economic warfare, which was expressed in bans on the transfer of military and dual-use technologies to the Soviet Union, grain embargoes, restrictions on lending, accusations of dumping, refusal to provide the most favored nation treatment in trade, etc. However, the effect of the West's economic warfare against the USSR was very limited. Firstly, the Soviet Union learned to bypass some restrictions and bans on trade with the West. Secondly, the overall dependence of the Soviet economy on both exports and imports remained low for three decades after World War II. Thirdly, the USSR began to cover some of its import needs at the expense of other socialist countries.
Only in the 1970-e years the situation has changed. At the end of 1973, black gold prices in the world market jumped four times. Rain from petrodollars spilled on the USSR, and gradually the country got hooked on an oil needle. From an industrial power, the Soviet Union began to turn into a raw material one, which increased the efficiency of subsequent actions of the West within the framework of economic war.
* * *
Examples of the low effectiveness of economic sanctions in our time are the actions of the West against Iraq and Iran.
After Iraq’s annexation of Kuwait (which, incidentally, Saddam Hussein deliberately provoked the United States) on August 6 of the United Nations, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1990 (661), which provided for the use of forced measures against Iraq weapons. All financial flows and any goods came under the effect of such measures, the only exceptions were supplies intended for medical purposes and food supplies within the framework of humanitarian aid. The main thing is that Iraq has blocked its oil export channels.
Of course, the impact of the sanctions on the Iraqi economy, which depended on the export of black gold, was very sensitive. On the eve of the sanctions, the oil sector provided more than 60% of Iraq’s GDP. The standard of living of the population began to fall, in some places food shortages began to be felt. There was a continuous devaluation of the national currency. During the period of the comprehensive measures from 1990 to 1995, the Iraqi dinar fell in price against the US dollar by more than 20 times. Inflation on an annual basis was measured in hundreds of percent. However, after the “Oil for Food” program started (since 1996), inflation began to decline, and the problem of food and medicine shortages lost its urgency. Gradually, however, the leaders of Iraq built schemes that allowed them to trade with the outside world, bypassing the sanctions. It is precisely because of the ineffectiveness of economic sanctions that Washington decided to invade Iraq.
As for Iran, it has been under the sanctions of the United States and its allies for 35 for years, but there are no signs of the crisis of this state. Negative phenomena in the Iranian economy, of course, are noticeable (especially in oil production due to bans on the supply of equipment for the industry), an additional burden on the Iranian economy arose due to the fact that Washington was able to connect to the EU sanctions, but literally for 2-3 For years, Iran has managed to adapt to the total oil blockade of the West. For Washington, it was an extremely unpleasant surprise. Iran, in fact, has become a kind of textbook that shows other countries how to bypass Western sanctions. From our point of view, this was the main reason that in 2013, at the initiative of Washington in Geneva, negotiations began with Iran on its nuclear program with the participation of the six intermediaries (five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany). We do not think, however, that the United States is concerned most about the Iranian nuclear program, just as we do not think that in exchange for winding down the nuclear program, the West will curtail sanctions against Iran. Even in the case of Washington’s promise to defrost part of the arrested Iranian currency reserves (ostensibly in good faith), we are talking about a very small part of Iranian reserves. In addition, the US administration stresses that any possible decisions to lift sanctions against Iran will be "reversible."
Summarizing, we can draw the following conclusions.
1. Without denying the impact of sanctions on the economy of the countries being sanctioned, it should be recognized that the sanctioning countries manage to achieve political goals quite seldom. The negative social consequences of sanctions are usually compensated by the fact that the authorities use sanctions for the ideological and political consolidation of society.
2. The impact of sanctions may weaken over time, as the sanctioned countries adapt to sanctions in various ways. Sanctions are often the impetus for a major restructuring of the economy.
3. Sanctioning countries themselves often incur significant losses due to the fact that their companies are deprived of the opportunity to trade with authorized countries. In this case, there may be an increase in the competitive positions of companies from countries that do not participate in sanctions.
4. In the absence of the desired political effect, sanctioning countries may resort to using other methods of pressure on the countries being sanctioned (diplomatic, military, special operations operations, etc.).
5. The West in every way ignores cases of inefficient use of economic sanctions, using their threat as a deterrent for countries that deviate from the course of the Western centers of power.
In the final article, based on an analysis of world experience, we will consider the issue of how to adapt different countries to the sanctions regime.
For a long period of active use of economic sanctions in the world, experience has accumulated both in the organization of such sanctions and in opposition to them. Perhaps the richest experience in countering sanctions has been gained by Russia, and almost all of it falls on the Soviet period of its history.
Soviet experience in countering economic sanctions
In the initial years of the existence of Soviet Russia, the trade and sea blockade by its former allies (the Entente countries) was overcome by organizing commodity flows through neutral countries (Persia, Turkey, China) or through smuggling corridors (one of the main such corridors passed through the Baltic States and Scandinavia). After the global economic crisis broke out at the end of 1929, the Soviet Union began to play on the contradictions between the Western countries, seeking to weaken or even lift the sanctions by some of them.
A strategic solution to the problems generated by economic sanctions was the industrialization of Soviet Russia. One of the main tasks of industrialization in December 1925 was declared the maximum reduction of the dependence of the Soviet economy on foreign markets, relying on its own resources and its own production. In the period 1929-1941. almost 10 of thousands of enterprises that produced the production of means of production, consumer goods, as well as all types of weapons and military equipment were built in the country. The economy of that period was mobilized, its most important elements were: centralized management of the national economy, 100-percent government participation in industry, medium-term (five-year) policy planning, collectivization of agriculture, complete eradication of any form of capital (industrial, commercial, monetary), nationalization of monetary -credit system, equalization of living standards of all segments of the population (social programs, fight against unearned income, etc.), state monopoly of external bargaining ovli, state currency monopoly.
From the first steps of industrialization, it was possible to find an approach to American companies that were in the midst of a severe economic crisis. It was they who supplied equipment for the construction of the first five-year plan in the USSR, made equipment installation and commissioning works. Deliveries were carried out on the terms of commercial lending, which alleviated the problems associated with the lack of currency. Then the American "window of opportunity" began to gradually close; in subsequent years, German firms became the main suppliers of machinery and equipment. It is noteworthy that industrialization was carried out absolutely without attracting foreign investment in the Soviet economy. Previously, foreign capital was present in the USSR only in the form of concessions, the latter of which were liquidated in 1932-1933. (1) For several decades, the Soviet economy had an autarchic character: the share of exports and imports in the gross product of the USSR was only a few percent. This made the Soviet Union low-vulnerable to economic sanctions.
However, from the middle of the 1970's. USSR's dependence on exports and imports began to increase. In 1973, world oil prices jumped 4 times. Instead of continuing to strengthen the country's industrial potential, the Soviet leadership chose the path of least resistance. The economic, social, and military problems of the country began to be solved with the help of petrodollars, which is why the effectiveness of Western economic sanctions has steadily increased over the past decade and a half of the USSR’s existence. The collapse in oil prices on the world market in 1986 cannot formally be attributed to economic sanctions against the USSR, but there is no doubt that this collapse was planned by Washington with the aim of finally undermining the Soviet economy. It was an action of economic war, and it reached the goal. Five years later, the Soviet Union ceased to exist.
Iran and Iraq: three levels of opposition to sanctions
Among the countries that have quite successfully resisted the economic sanctions of the West in recent years, include Iraq and Iran. Against the first, the sanctions actually operated in 1990-2003. (formally - up to 2010 year), against the second - from 1979 year to the present. In both countries, three levels of opposition to sanctions can be identified:
- adaptation of foreign economic activity to prohibitions and restrictions on the part of authorizing countries;
- import substitution by domestic production and diversification of the export commodity structure;
- measures in the distribution of vital goods.
Measures to adapt foreign economic activity to the conditions of sanctions
Here are the following areas:
a) reorientation in foreign economic activity to the states that do not participate in economic sanctions (“non-aligned states”);
b) use for international payments of funds alternative to the US dollar and the euro;
c) use for trade of intermediary companies operating under the flags of various states.
Sanctions against Iraq were imposed by the UN, but even that was not enough to organize an iron ring of the blockade around the country. Iraq has concluded agreements with neighboring states - Jordan, Egypt, Turkey, through which oil supplies from Iraq and the import into Iraq of a wide range of goods (from machinery, equipment and military equipment to food and medicine) went. All these operations were known to Washington, but US pressure on Iraq’s neighbors did not have any effect. According to the CIA, over the years of the sanctions, Iraq has managed to sell oil worth 75 billion. In addition to the channel of intergovernmental agreements, international contracts and intermediaries have been used for international trade. Among such individuals and legal entities there were quite a few citizens and firms from China, France, and Russia. Some of the legal entities were one-day firms that were created for the performance of one contract.
The blockade, which the United States for many years tried to organize around Iran, looks even more “full of holes”. US sanctions against this state are not UN sanctions. Only at the beginning of 2010 did Washington succeed in connecting the European Union to the sanctions against Iran, but in a year or two Iran shifted from the European market to the markets of such countries as China, India, Turkey, Russia. A number of small Arab states neighboring Iran are used as transit points for trade. Before the EU joined the sanctions of Washington, many European companies managed to make considerable investments in the Iranian economy. For example, French companies settled in the automotive, German and English - in the Iranian mining industry. Now these European companies continue to cooperate with Iran, but not directly, but through states and firms playing the role of intermediaries. For example, they can send equipment to fictitious addresses to Turkey, then equipment from Turkey should go to Dubai (UAE), and from there to the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas. There are other transit routes - through South Africa, Malaysia. Often, the flow patterns of goods are straightened, goods ply directly between Iran and Turkey. For Turkey, although it is a member of NATO, Iran remains the largest trading partner (although official statistics of Turkey do not reflect its trade with Iran in full).
It is extremely important for the countries to be sanctioned to avoid settlements in the main reserve currencies, especially in the US dollar. Such calculations are controlled by the West, since operations pass through the correspondent accounts of American and European banks. Today, Iran has almost completely emancipated from the dollar in its trade calculations. Quite a substantial part of Iran’s trade is carried out on the basis of barter, that is, direct commodity exchange. An increasing part of trade transactions is serviced with the help of currencies of countries - trading partners of Iran. This, above all, the Chinese yuan, Indian rupee, South Korean won. The Russian ruble is also used. Gold becomes another instrument of calculation.
In addition, in Iran there is a tendency to strengthen state control in the monetary and foreign exchange sphere. To strengthen the rial, the Bank of Iran acquires gold from India and Turkey and foreign exchange through a network of money changers in Iraq. The state returned to the restriction of exchange, introduced a single exchange rate. A center for economic and monetary stabilization has been created at the Bank of Iran.
Import substitution by domestic production
Particularly relevant for Iraq and Iran has become the task of replacing food imports with domestic production. Immediately after the introduction of sanctions against Iraq in 1990, his government made a number of decisions to increase its own agricultural production, both through fuller land engagement, and by subsidizing rural producers and guaranteed public procurement. Decree No. XXUMX of the Iraqi Revolutionary Command Council said: "All lands that are not used by their owners or others in accordance with their agricultural purpose will be nationalized without compensation." The Ministry of Agriculture compensated farmers for up to 367% of seed value, in 100, 1990 million dinars were spent on this. Iraqi agriculture became planned: farmers were given detailed instructions on what to plant, when and how; failure to follow instructions was punishable. By October 586, the government began to buy the entire crop without intermediaries. These measures have helped to significantly increase the harvest. According to Iraqi official sources, 1992 million tons of crop was harvested in 1989, with 1 in year - 1990 million tons. Arable land increased by 2,5%.
Iran also began to pursue a policy of import substitution, not only for food but also for a wide range of industrial products. 23 August 2012 Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, called on the government to create a "resistance economy" capable of withstanding international sanctions. This new term actually meant the continuation of the course of economic jihad, officially proclaimed by Rahbar in 2011 year, and in fact held from the first days of the existence of Iran. The economic jihad pursues two main goals: reducing Iran’s dependence on oil exports and switching to exports of high-quality products; decline in the import of vital goods, primarily food and medicine.
Iran: diversification of the export commodity structure and the search for new trading partners
Supporters of tightening sanctions against Iran in the West are trying to prove that the Iranian economy under pressure from sanctions is increasingly weakening. Sometimes they refer to the statement of the Iranian Oil Ministry of 2012, according to which, after the EU’s accession to Washington’s sanctions, Iran’s revenues from oil exports decreased by more than 40%.
However, this is a very sly interpretation of the processes occurring in the economy of Iran. The fact is that Iran began to change the structure of its exports by increasing the processed raw materials and other commodity groups (except oil). Thus, in the 2012 year (2), exports of polyethylene and fertilizers amounted to 9 billion dollars, plastics - 3,2 billion dollars, building materials (stone, cement and related products) - 8,2 billion dollars, agricultural products - 5,3 billion. dollars, carpets - 0,8 billion.
According to the Iranian Customs Administration, the main partners of Iran in 2013 for non-oil exports (without gas condensate) were China, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates, India, Afghanistan, and Turkey. All of them (except Afghanistan) showed an increase in purchases of Iranian goods. So, in 2012, China purchased goods from Iran (except for crude oil) in the amount of $ 4,8 billion, and in 2013, Chinese purchases in Iran increased to $ 7,4 billion.
As for the main import partners of Iran, they were ranked according to the 2013 results for the year as follows: United Arab Emirates, China, India, South Korea, Turkey, Switzerland, Germany. Imports from countries such as South Korea, Switzerland and Germany decreased slightly compared with 2012 year. However, there was a much more significant increase in imports from other countries. From the UAE, imports grew from 9,3 to 10,8 billion dollars, from China - from 7,1 billion to 9,6 billion dollars. Import from India was particularly significant: from 1,6 billion to 4,3 billion dollars. All this dispels the efficiency myth Western sanctions against Iran.
Iran’s share of world GDP in 2013 was 0,74%. It is projected that in 2014, this figure will increase to 0,76%, in 2015, to 0,80%, and in 2016, to 0,85%. The share of Iran in the global petrochemical market at the beginning of this decade was 2,4%; in the fifth five-year program of development of the Islamic Republic of Iran (2011-2015) it is planned to bring this figure to 4,9%. In the petrochemical market of the Near and Middle East, the share of Iran reaches 23,4%; by 2020, it is planned to bring this figure to 41%.
In February, 2014, the Iranian government announced a plan of action in line with the "economy of resistance". In essence, this is a plan for the mobilization of the Iranian economy. It consists of 24 items. One of the important points is the development of cooperation with countries that do not participate in economic sanctions on the side of the United States. Tehran pays a particularly important role to the development of cooperation with Russia.
___________
(1) The reader can learn the details of the industrialization of the USSR in the conditions of the economic blockade from my book: “The economic war against Russia and the Stalinist industrialization” (Moscow: Algorithm, 2014).
(2) This refers to the Iranian year, which begins on March 21 and ends on March 20 on the European calendar. In this case, the year 2012 refers to the period from 21 March 2012 to 20 March 2013 of the European calendar. On the Iranian calendar, it is 1391 year.
Information