As death rates skyrocket in the familiar, democratic countries around us, it becomes easy to overlook the impact of COVID-19 outside of the western bubble. Specifically, for countries where sanctions have crippled the national economy for years even before the crisis, a continued imposition of these policies could spell mass hunger and contagion during a critical time.

Unilateral sanctions already inflict severe economic consequences in vulnerable countries - including Syria, Venezuela, Iran and Cuba. Many, however, fear a further progression into complete famine as employment opportunities become rarer and rarer. This is largely due to an impoverished population that is unfairly denied from foreign food aid as large trade tariffs substantially mark up the price of these products, disregarding the people’s fundamental right to sufficient and adequate food. In fact, WFP director David Beasley notes that the current trend could lead to a worst case scenario of some three dozen countries trapped in a “hunger pandemic”. Many UN officials have voiced their support for lifting international food sanctions in hopes of ensuring enough food supplies reach hungry populations during the COVID-19 crisis.

More imminently, however, is the demand for essential medicines and medical equipment that are impeded by strict international export constraints. Take Iran for instance, where the infected count rises by almost fifty every hour, and the death count by one every 10 minutes (as of March 19th). These alarming rates come largely as a result of a lack of medical supplies to support the country's debilitated healthcare infrastructure - which in turn is caused by a combination of weak purchasing powers (due to depreciating Iranian currency) and underfinanced humanitarian imports (due to, again, the sanctions). Even exemptions - designed specifically to allow for humanitarian aid in times like these - are largely ineffective in practice. For one, Human Rights Watch found that these exemptions have “failed to offset the strong reluctance of US and European companies and banks to risk incurring sanctions [...] by exporting or financing exempted humanitarian goods.” Systemic issues with mandatory licensing for these goods have also plagued the process - general licenses are capped at $500,000 and excludes certain supplies that are crucial to fighting the virus (e.g. decontamination equipment, full-mask respirators), while special licenses that do grant access to these supplies have an acceptance rate of a mere 10% under the Trump administration. In all, if drastic changes to international sanctions are not influenced soon, the western hemisphere would only be guilty of compounding these countries’ agony by “depriving them of access to the critical medical resources they urgently need”.

Sanctions have long been used to address authoritarian regimes that threaten the peace and security of the international community, but its true effects could be perverse to the expected. As the upholders of human rights, it is our responsibility - and particularly so during this unforeseen crisis - to ensure that it is not the civilians who suffer from these broader consequences. And we can only do so with a thorough re-envisioning on the role of sanctions to protect the accessibility to crucial food and medicine for the most vulnerable.