@article{028dde74ba3d4e5bb2936a8c84c6e2d2,
title = "Norms and sanctions: Lessons from the socialization of South Africa",
author = "Audie Klotz",
note = "Funding Information: For extensive discussions about sanctions, I thank David Black, Neta Crawford, Eileen Crumm, Peter Katzenstein and Beth DeSombre. I gratefully acknowledge research and writing support from the (US) National Science Foundation graduate fellowship program, the MacArthur Foundation-Social Science Research Council program in international peace and security, and the Center for International Studies at the University of Southern California. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 1993 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC. Some studies do descriptively identify norms as important but do not pursue the analytical relationship between norms and sanctions. A notable exception is Kim Richard Nossal who argues that sanctions are sometimes used punitively to express moral disapproval; see 'International Sanctions as International Punishment', International Organization, 43 (1989), pp. 301-22. However, the act of punishment, rather than the target's response, becomes the analytical focus. Sanctions are thus successful by definition. 1 Realist analyses generally adopt materialist and statist assumptions. As Kim Richard Nossal rightly points out, the 'generic' theory of sanctions derives primarily from the perspective of hegemonic states, which is an additional reflection of the predominance of the realist theoretical perspective; see Rain Dancing: Sanctions in Canadian and Australian Foreign Policy (Toronto, 1994).",
year = "1996",
month = apr,
doi = "10.1017/s0260210500118364",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "173--190",
journal = "Review of International Studies",
issn = "0260-2105",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "2",
}