1/ I appreciate that @PeterBeinart highlights the murderous impact of US sanctions worldwide. It's a vital issue, and he deserves credit for bringing attention to it. Unfortunately he adopts the imperial mentality underlying the sieges he opposes: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/15/opinion/us-sanctions.html

2/ @PeterBeinart says sanctions "might be more defensible — or at least briefer — if they stood a reasonable chance of success" or "married to remotely realistic objectives."

So it's OK to strangle Venezuela and Syria if we could overthrow their leaders? Are we Darth Vader?

3/ In reality, where all people are equal, US has no right to destroy others’ economies and health care systems, no matter how “realistic” the “objectives” are. There’s also something called international law and the UN Charter, which bars the unilateral imposition of sanctions.

4/ To understand the imperial mindset, just apply @PeterBeinart’s logic inward. Would he support another state denying US kids food & medicine if it could “realistically” & “successfully” collapse the US state, which causes plenty of global harm (e.g. via murderous sanctions)?

5/ BTW, @PeterBeinart falsely suggests the sanctions policy "helped achieve" goals in Iran. But as @TritaParsi wrote in “Losing An Enemy”, Iran’s nuclear program developed faster than Obama could destroy Iran’s economy. "Sanctions never stopped their program," Wendy Sherman said.