@stephenjudkins @crookedfootball I guess, but I don't think @crookedfootball is in fact arguing against the sanctions regime, nor would I! We didn't broadly blame the "Iraqi people" in the 90s, but maintained a notoriously devastating sanctions regime. (In a bank shot, you might argue the 2nd Iraq War might have been avoided if we did demonize the Iraqi people, so that continuing less-harm sanctions would have remained internationally sustainable.) 1/

in reply to @stephenjudkins

@stephenjudkins @crookedfootball Less speculatively, the useful relationship between not-demonizing and sanctions regimes is that burdens on the broad public are viewed as a cost. Beyond Russia, the recent trend is to target sanctions towards leadership (which, given the poor effectiveness of sanctions in general, seems to do about as much good with less "collateral damage"). 2/

in reply to self

@stephenjudkins @crookedfootball That's not the case with Russia, of course, where the goal is to degrade industrial capacity to fight and so sanctions are as broad and hermetic as possible. But as you say, it's easy to justify that on least-harm terms without resorting to any blame of the Russian public. It's a shame—really!—that blameless Russian workers lose their jobs at auto plants, but its a much lesser harm than enabling what Russia's doing in Ukraine or escalating to a greater war. /fin

in reply to self