Abstract

States are increasingly reverting to economic coercion in international politics. The sweeping use of sanctions and – particularly since President Trump’s second term in office – tariffs to influence other states is evidence of its growing salience. Economic coercion refers to the use of economic tools – specifically economic restrictions – to coerce a foreign government, actor, or entity to change its policies. This toolbox encompasses a variety of instruments, with sanctions being one of the most frequently used. Sanctions have become established as the go-to tools for responding to international peace and security questions. Between 1990 and 2018, the world’s leading sanctioners – namely the United States (US), European Union (EU), United Nations (UN), and regional organizations – imposed around 400 sanctions cases to address issues such as armed interventions, human rights abuses, democratic backsliding, and nuclear proliferation.1 Sanctions have also been at the heart of international political debates in recent years. In the early days of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, the US and EU, together with other G7 partners, imposed sweeping sanctions on Russia. More recently, in September 2025, the UN Security Council reimposed sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program after France, Germany, and the United Kingdom invoked the snapback mechanism foreseen in the Iran Nuclear Deal (also known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, JCPOA). However, the increasing use of tariffs for ostensibly political purposes raises questions about the evolving nature of economic coercion. This policy brief discusses the blurring lines between sanctions and tariffs, as well as, Trump’s playbook of economic coercion more generally.