The sanctions against Iran have been lifted, which makes it timely to consider their effects. While their purpose was to modify the behavior of Iran’s leaders, it’s worth considering unintended consequences, and to this point Abbas Edalat, professor of computer science in both London and Tehran, speaks in NewScientist’s (20 February 2016, paywall) One Minute Interview section:
What impact did sanctions have?
Ironically, virtually none on the government, but for many ordinary people they were devastating. Because the Iranian banking system was cut off from the rest of the world, vital medicines could not be paid for. A lot of cancer patients died. For a couple of decades, researchers couldn’t download software from the US or buy vital equipment. As sanctions deepened, they could not even pay for journal subscriptions. US researchers were barred from visiting or giving advice without permission, and a lot of Iranian researchers could not get visas to travel to the US or to Europe. It was very difficult to do any collaborative work.
And yet Iranian science seems in relatively rude health. How come?
Scientists in Iran took the view that failure was not an option. They would just try to get around the problems posed by sanctions – smuggling in the part they needed, building it themselves or devising ways to do without it. They innovated.
They innovated, which might be best considered as they evolved. Using the language of evolutionary biology, selection pressures were brought to bear on Iran, and they adapted to them.
Frankly, this had not occurred to me, but I presume most direct observers of Iran had noted it. But do our political leaders? We advocate for sanctions as a peaceful approach to stopping aggressive countries who do not share our ideology, but we never consider the possibility that a sanction may result in the development of a better technology than our own, in part or in total.
This seems to me to be an underappreciated risk of the strategy – and something to think about.
And don’r forget this guy.
