Coercion and Democracy: Symbolic Role of Economic Sanctions in the US

We assume that the motivation for the use of economic sanctions is rooted in the ambition of the policy-makers to change the behaviour of a target state. Yet, given the low effectiveness of sanctions, scholars suggest that sanctions are imposed to address the expectations of the domestic audience and the motivation is symbolic. I test the symbolic argument and look for the presence of an audience benefit for an imposition of sanctions and an audience cost for issuing of an empty threat. I find no evidence for an increase in popularity following an imposition of sanctions, nor a decline in popularity after an empty threat. However, I do observe that US president are more likely to follow up on a threat of sanctions if they have experienced a spell of decrease in approval ratings. Thus, US presidents do play at the home crowd with sanctions, but the crowd is indifferent.