Sanctions have become the dominant tool of statecraft in the United States and other Western states, especially the European Union, since the end of the Cold War. But the systematic use of this instrument may produce unintended and somewhat paradoxical geopolitical consequences. The sanctions imposed on the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Russian Federation in the field of energy are particularly illustrative of this phenomenon.
Firstly, Iran and Russia demonstrated their resilience and a real ability to adapt, thus transforming the perspective to European companies. One of Tehran's responses to sanctions was to establish the so-called "resistance economy" in order to make Iran resistant to all kinds of economic shocks and reduce the reliance on a single commodity. For its part, Russia has adapted and offered new perspective to European and Asian businesses by creating a precedent with the case of Total. Some European companies are not ready to operate according to these rules—at least in the gas sector, as oil is too risky relative to U.S. policy and law.
Secondly, differences in the approach of the United States and Europe over the type and intensity of economic statecraft against both Iran and Russia have increasingly undermined trans-Atlanticism. The so-called secondary sanctions imposed on both Iran and Russia have become the primary vehicle for signaling and even implementing a decoupling of U.S. and European political objectives. On the one hand, the costs of complying with U.S. secondary sanctions is perceived as too high for European companies. On the other, Europeans are not ready to bear the consequences of internal U.S. divisions.
All of this might even have reinvigorated the European project, by triggering a debate on the need for European countries to protect their economic sovereignty. The European Green Deal might become the emerging unifying theme that might relaunch the European project and make Europe a fully-fledged geopolitical actor.