Quote

Opponents of U.S. sanctions have made 'unilateral sanctions' their special target. They argue that sanctions observed by many nations would be much more effective. True enough. Far better for trade with an outlaw regime to be restricted by many nations than by just one.

Sanctions are a bad idea.

I don't want to say that sanctions are ridiculous and that we couldn't care less; these are not pleasant things... We find little joy in that, but there are no painful sensations. We have lived through tougher times.

Sanctions are a sign of irritation; they are not the instrument of serious policies.

We believe that unilateral sanctions violate international law, in fact. They violate free trade. They violate human growth and development, human development, and that when you actually sanction a bank of a country, the meaning of it is quite clear. You're sanctioning medicine for the people.

Politicians often call for sanctions as a way of sounding tough when they don't want to take riskier measures.

Sanctions and negotiations can be very ineffective, and indeed foolish, unless the people you are talking with and negotiating with and trying to reach agreements with are people who can be trusted to keep their word.

Sanctions and boycotts would be tied to serious political dialogue.

Macro-trading requires a high degree of skill, focus and repetition. Life events, such as birth, divorce, death of a loved one and other emotional highs and lows are obstacles to success in this specific field of finance.

Sanctions historically are quite counterproductive in the sense that if you impose sanctions on your enemy, it tends to strengthen your enemy.