Iranian authorities and aligned voices frame 47 years of sanctions as a single, continuous assault on ordinary Iranians. Sanctions regimes from the United States and Europe restricted banking access, energy revenue, shipping insurance, and foreign investment, then pushed costs into household life through inflation, shortages, and wage collapse. Humanitarian exceptions exist on paper, yet financial choke points and overcompliance from banks and shippers frequently block lawful trade, especially for medicine and medical devices. Regime leaders also shaped outcomes through policy choices, corruption, and sanctions-evasion networks that shift pain downward and protect insiders.
Primary sanctioning actors include the United States government and the European Union. Enforcement bodies include the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and EU institutions that adopt restrictive measures through Council decisions and regulations. Financial messaging and compliance actors include SWIFT and major correspondent banks that control access to cross-border payments. Iranian state institutions under heavy pressure include the Central Bank of Iran and major ministries, alongside state-linked energy, shipping, and procurement networks.
Sanctions tightened around five pressure points. Banking isolation limited payment routing and correspondent relationships, including disconnection of sanctioned Iranian banks from SWIFT under EU action in 2012. Energy sanctions targeted crude oil and petrochemical exports, then constrained access to hard currency. Shipping and insurance restrictions raised transport costs and blocked cargo coverage. Technology and dual-use controls restricted advanced industrial inputs, software, and laboratory equipment. Designations against individuals and entities expanded compliance fear across global firms, even when licenses technically allowed humanitarian trade.
So What
Sanctions operate like a vise with two jaws. One jaw targets state revenue and procurement. Another jaw chills private-sector behavior through legal risk, audits, and reputational fear. That second jaw hits ordinary people hardest because households depend on stable prices, imported inputs, and functioning banking rails more than elites do. Sanctions also reshape the domestic economy toward smuggling, patronage, and monopolies, since well-connected networks handle the “grey” routes while normal businesses lose access.
Iran’s information space sits under fresh strain from renewed rounds of designations tied to oil sales, shipping networks, and sanctions evasion activity. Currency volatility and headline inflation keep public anger close to the surface, so narratives that blame foreign pressure offer a simple, emotionally satisfying story. State messaging also seeks preemptive control over blame allocation, especially when internal factions fight over economic management and sanctions strategy.
Medical and pharmaceutical access suffers through payment blockage, not formal bans. Licenses and exemptions allow humanitarian goods, yet banks frequently refuse transfers linked to Iran, suppliers demand intermediaries, and shipping insurers avoid exposure. Patients experience stockouts, delayed treatment, and price spikes for imported medicines and components. Banking sanctions block routine international trade settlement, disrupt remittances, and isolate lawful commerce. Energy sanctions reduce fiscal room, then push the state toward money creation, subsidy games, and price shocks. Shipping and insurance constraints raise import costs and slow delivery schedules. Currency pressure translates into inflation, wealth destruction, and wage collapse. Investment deterrence deepens unemployment among youth and skilled workers, accelerates capital flight, and weakens productivity.
]
Three near-term dynamics shape the next phase. First, enforcement focus keeps moving toward networks that move Iranian oil and money through third countries, which increases pressure on shipping, terminals, traders, and shadow fleets. Second, domestic legitimacy stress rises as the rial weakens and daily prices reset upward faster than salaries. Third, regime actors expand narrative control to channel anger outward and label internal dissent as foreign manipulation. A plausible next step involves tighter targeting of logistics, ports, ship management firms, and financial nodes that touch China-linked refining and transshipment. Another plausible step involves broader humanitarian payment channels that reduce civilian harm, yet political distrust and compliance fear keep progress slow.
Sanctions narratives rarely describe mechanisms, because mechanisms feel boring. Mechanisms also reveal uncomfortable truths. Iranian messaging often compresses decades into a single moral tale, then swaps policy detail for moral injury. That rhetorical move changes how audiences think. People remember pain. People also search for a single cause when life feels unstable. Sanctions messaging exploits that human reflex.
Financial sanctions form the spine of the pressure system. Oil revenue matters, yet money movement matters more. A buyer, a ship, and a barrel mean little without payment clearing, insurance binding, and documentation passing compliance screens. Banking restrictions force trade into workarounds. Workarounds raise costs and invite rent-seeking. Rent-seeking rewards insiders who control access to licenses, ports, customs, and exchange windows. Ordinary importers pay more, wait longer, and risk seizure. Household prices rise even when shelves stay stocked, because every step adds a premium for risk.
SWIFT disconnection in 2012 delivered a psychological shock as much as a financial shock. Traders lost routine messaging channels. Banks lost frictionless verification. Payment time increased. Transaction failure rates increased. Every added day in settlement adds exposure to currency movement, which encourages hoarding and speculative behavior. Speculation then feeds panic buying, which feeds scarcity, even without a true supply collapse. Market psychology turns into a multiplier.
Energy sanctions target state revenue, yet the social effect depends on state choices. Governments choose how to distribute scarcity. Leaders choose subsidy models. Leaders choose which sectors receive scarce foreign currency at preferential rates. Leaders also choose secrecy or transparency around those choices. Preferential currency regimes often become corruption engines. Import licenses become political favors. Fake invoices and overpricing become routine. Smuggling networks thrive. Citizens then see a paradox—sanctions claim to target leaders, yet leaders display wealth while citizens line up for basics. That paradox fuels rage, yet state propaganda redirects rage outward.
Shipping and insurance restrictions look technical, yet families feel them in food and household goods. Insurance refusal forces traders into niche insurers and complex routing. Complex routing adds delays and spoilage risk for perishables. Importers hedge that risk through higher pricing. That higher pricing hits the poor first. Middle-class families slide into survival mode, then abandon long-term plans like education, savings, and entrepreneurship. Social trust erodes as neighbors compete for scarce goods.
Technology and scientific restrictions inflict slow damage. Laboratory equipment, industrial software, spare parts, and specialized sensors keep factories safe and productive. Missing parts also raise safety risk, including aviation maintenance stress when supply chains break. Fear grows when people ride planes and wonder about maintenance quality. Fear also becomes political fuel. Authorities point outward. Citizens look inward and ask why the state keeps choosing confrontation that triggers isolation.
Food and agricultural inputs sit inside a feedback loop. Modern agriculture relies on fertilizers, pesticides, machinery parts, and stable fuel supply. Sanctions that disrupt payments and shipping disrupt those inputs. Input disruption reduces yields or raises costs. Higher costs translate into higher food prices. Food prices anchor public perception of economic failure. Leaders know that, so messaging focuses on food and medicine even when other sectors suffer equally.
Targeted sanctions on individuals and institutions create a spillover effect. A designation marks a bank, a ministry, or a shipping company as radioactive. Private firms then avoid any contact with anything adjacent, even lawful contact. Compliance teams prefer zero exposure. That risk posture becomes a form of shadow sanctioning that goes beyond the legal text. Civilians then pay the difference between what regulations permit and what private actors allow.
Sanctions alone do not explain the full scale of harm. Domestic governance decisions amplify harm through mismanagement, corruption, opaque budgeting, factional conflict, and repression that blocks honest economic debate. State priorities also matter. Resources devoted to regional proxy networks, internal security organs, and narrative control do not fund hospitals, water systems, or job creation. Citizens experience the combined effect as a single crushing weight, yet analysis requires separation of variables. Foreign pressure restricts options. Domestic decisions determine distribution of pain.
Messaging that lists sanction categories performs a persuasive function. Lists feel factual. Lists feel complete. Lists also hide agency. A list implies inevitability, as if history imposed suffering with no choices along the way. Readers absorb the emotional truth of hardship and then accept the political conclusion, because the structure guides them there. That structure also pushes audiences toward binary thinking—foreign cruelty versus domestic innocence. Binary thinking blocks practical solutions, because solutions require trade-offs, negotiation, and institutional reform.
A stronger analytic frame treats sanctions as a system with incentives. External actors seek constraint of state behavior through economic pressure. Internal elites seek survival through control of rents, repression, and narrative dominance. Civilians sit in the middle as the transmission medium. Pressure travels through banks, ports, insurers, exchange markets, and supply chains. Pain concentrates where people lack buffers—low-income families, patients with chronic illness, small merchants, and youth seeking jobs.
Iran’s sanctions story contains real suffering and real mechanisms that produce that suffering. Banking isolation, shipping insurance constraints, and energy restrictions disrupt trade and weaken currency stability, then pass costs into medicine access, food prices, and employment. Humanitarian exemptions exist, yet financial choke points and private-sector risk avoidance often block legal transactions. Regime governance choices and corruption networks frequently amplify harm and protect insiders, which deepens public anger. Narrative framing that treats sanctions as the only cause simplifies reality, concentrates blame outward, and reduces pressure for internal accountability. Forecasting points toward sustained targeting of evasion networks tied to oil and shipping, continued currency stress, and intensified state messaging that channels public frustration away from domestic decision-makers.
References
Cipriani, M., Goldberg, L. S., & La Spada, G. (2023). Financial sanctions, SWIFT, and the architecture of the international payments system (Staff Report No. 1047). Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Council of the European Union. (2012). Council Decision 2012/35/CFSP of 23 January 2012 amending Decision 2010/413/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Iran. Official Journal of the European Union.
Human Rights Watch. (2019). “Maximum pressure”: U.S. economic sanctions harm Iranians’ right to health.
Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of the Treasury. (2020). FAQ 824: Swiss Humanitarian Trade Arrangement (SHTA).
Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of the Treasury. (2020). FAQ 830: Guidance related to medicines and medical devices under Iran-related authorities.
Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of the Treasury. (n.d.). Iran sanctions program and country information.
SWIFT. (2012). SWIFT instructed to disconnect sanctioned Iranian banks following EU Council decision [Press release].
SWIFT. (n.d.). SWIFT and sanctions [Compliance overview].
World Bank. (2024). Iran economic monitor, Spring 2024: Sustaining growth amid rising geopolitical tensions.
