Zimbabwe: are targeted sanctions smart enough?

This briefing by the Institute for Security Studies examines the efficacy of targeted sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe's ruling elite. It details the various restrictive measures implemented by Western governments and international bodies, argues that these 'smart sanctions' have been largely ineffective due to implementation loopholes and regional support for the Mugabe regime, and suggests a conditional, middle-ground approach to lifting some restrictions to encourage political progress under the Inclusive Government.

• Targeted sanctions in Zimbabwe, designed to pressure the ruling elite without harming the general population, have had limited effectiveness due to inconsistencies in implementation and the ability of targeted individuals to circumvent them. Loopholes allowed individuals to travel via third countries or attend international meetings, reducing the pressure to change behavior.
• The Mugabe government has successfully used targeted sanctions as a political tool, portraying them as 'illegal economic sanctions' to scapegoat the West for Zimbabwe's economic decline and to consolidate domestic political support through anti-imperialist rhetoric.
• The impact of Western restrictive measures was further buffered by the support of regional bodies like SADC and the AU, as well as bilateral relations with China, which provided military aircraft and credit lines, effectively bypassing arms embargoes.
• The document identifies a variety of restrictive measures implemented since the 1990s, including arms embargoes by the UK, USA, and EU; travel bans and asset freezes targeting hundreds of individuals and businesses; and the suspension of Zimbabwe's membership in the Commonwealth.
• While some economic improvements occurred after the February 2009 inauguration of the Inclusive Government—such as the halting of spiralling inflation and the reopening of schools—the author suggests these were likely driven by the economic collapse itself rather than the pressure of sanctions.
• The author recommends a 'middle ground' approach where the international community removes certain restrictions as a sign of good faith to acknowledge improvements, while maintaining others until key conditions—such as parliamentary oversight of the security apparatus—are met.

APA

Smith-Höhn, J. (2010). Zimbabwe: are targeted sanctions smart enough? Institute for Security Studies. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/4Jun2010.pdf

Chicago

Smith-Höhn, Judy. Zimbabwe: are targeted sanctions smart enough? Institute for Security Studies, 2010. https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/4Jun2010.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Smith-Höhn |first1=Judy |title=Zimbabwe: are targeted sanctions smart enough? |publisher=Institute for Security Studies |date=4 June 2010 |url=https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/4Jun2010.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{smithhhn2010zimbabwe, author = {Smith-Höhn, Judy}, title = {{Zimbabwe: are targeted sanctions smart enough?}}, institution = {Institute for Security Studies}, year = {2010}, month = jun, url = {https://issafrica.s3.amazonaws.com/site/uploads/4Jun2010.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }