What if Global Powers Impose Sanctions on Washington One Day

The US has long used economic sanctions as a weapon against those states that refuse to bow before Washington. But maybe one day, the American leadership might get a taste of their own medicine, Martin Berger writes.

In its bid for global dominance Washington is developing military capabilities and gaining trade and economic advantages, journalist and geopolitical analyst Martin Berger writes in his article for New Eastern Outlook.

It is no secret, however, that on this path the US has repeatedly violated the norms of international law. And we are being forced into believing that US jurisdiction is somehow above it, the journalist notes.

"But there's yet another weapon of choice Washington has been using all too often — sanctions it's imposing on those states who refuse to yield once they contest American coercion," Berger stresses.

The journalist points out that the US goes even so far as to pressure its allies and partners into supporting such actions even if it results in damage to their own economic interests.

"The latest example of such unilateral action has been the ruling of the US Supreme Court to pay compensations to the families of those Americans killed in the terrorist attacks in 1983 and 1996 in Beirut and Riyadh, using the money from 'frozen' Iranian assets. This decision has provoked massive public outrage in Iran," the journalist recalls.

It seems the lesson has been learnt by Tehran, and in one of his recent statements, Iranian President Rouhani made it clear that Iran will not give Washington its money so easily.

Moreover, the Iranian parliament "approved the general outlines of a bill that would obligate the government to claim compensation from the United States for its hostile moves against Iran over the past 63 years," the Iran Project reported on April 17, 2016.

The media outlet specified that the cases particularly include the US involvement in the 1953 coup, the role Washington played in an 8-year Iraqi war on Iran in the 1980s, the damage the White House inflicted on Tehran "by dipping into Iran's assets frozen in the US banks," and the US support for Tel-Aviv's anti-Iran measures.

"Earlier, in a speech in the southeastern city of Kerman, President Rouhani pledged that Iran would 'take this case to the Hague in the near future and will not spare any effort towards the restoration of the nation's rights through legal, political and banking channels'," the media outlet emphasized, adding that the move came "in response to the US Supreme Court's decision in April to seize about $2 billion in frozen assets of Iran."

What does the move mean?

According to Berger, Iran has signaled to the international community that Washington is by no means "above the law." It is not the "global hegemon," who rules the world but a long number of countries that should co-exist in accordance with the norms of international law.

It cannot be excluded that one day the US leadership will get the taste of its own medicine, he notes.

"And there could be many such states, not only the nations of Asia (in particular Japan regarding Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Korea, Vietnam and many other others), but also nations including the former Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Syria, which may even create a 'unified alliance of victims of Washington's policies,' to make a united appeal for compensation," Berger stresses.

And in the event of the compensation not paid, the international community could choose to impose political and economic sanctions upon Washington.

Today is seems rather incredible, but should the pillars of the US dominance crumble some countries may jump at the opportunity to adopt Iran-like legislation against Washington and even freeze US assets.