Concerned about the situation in former SFRY, especially the rapid deterioration of the situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina, UNSCR 752 (15 May 1992), demanded an immediate cease-fire and an end to all interference from outside of Bosnia-Herzegovina, including the withdrawal or disbanding of Yugoslav and Croatian army present in the territory. Following the failure to act upon the resolution and a major escalation of violence (including the shelling of Sarajevo, endangering the lives of UNPROFOR personnel and humanitarian relief actors) by FRY-supported Bosnian-Serb forces, UNSCR 757 (30 May 1992) imposed comprehensive sanctions on the newly established Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro). To this end, it imposed an aviation ban, general financial and economic resources ban, a number of diplomatic and socio-cultural restrictions, and a general export ban on commodities and products from FRY (Serbia and Montenegro). After noting in UNSCR 757 that FRY's claim as the successor state to SFRY was not universally accepted, on 19 September 1992 the Security Council unanimously decided that FRY could not automatically hold a SFRY membership in the General Assembly and had to apply for UN membership (UNSCR 777).
Further comprehensive sanctions were imposed in UNSCR 787 (energy supplies), UNSCR 820 (provisions for seizure of goods and vehicles), and UNSCR 942 (targeting specifically Bosnian Serbs because of their resistance to territorial settlement). UNSCR 943 (23 September 1994) temporary suspended UNSCR 820 sanctions provisions with respect to civilian passenger flights and ferry services and UNSCR 757 prohibition on sporting events and cultural exchanges participation of aviation sanctions. The suspension was subsequently extended by UNSCRs 970, 988, 1003 and 1015.
Following a series of unsuccessful peace efforts, the Dayton Peace Agreement was reached on 21 November 1995, effectively ending the Bosnian War and providing for the internal territorial partition of country between the autonomous Republika Srpska and Federation of Bosnia-Herzegovina,. The following day, the UN Security Council passed two resolutions significantly altering the existing sanctions regime. UNSCR 1021 (22 November 1995) spelled out the details of a three phase termination of the UNSCR 713 arms imports embargo, effective upon the reception of a SG report regarding the formal signing of the Peace Agreement by the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Republic of Croatia, and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. UNSCR 1022 (22 November 1995) suspended all sanctions – exempting Bosnian Serbs from the suspension until their acceptance of the Dayton Peace Agreement (which they publically rejected upon the conclusion of the Dayton conference) zones of separation – and decided to terminate them ten days after the first free and fair elections (provided the Bosnian Serb withdrawal is complete). Following NATO certification of such a withdrawal, the remaining sanctions on Bosnian Serbs were suspended on 27 February 1996. Elections were held on 14 September 1996 and sanctions were officially terminated on 1 October 1996 (UNSCR 1074).
Coerce the Yugoslav (Serbian) government to cease hostilities, withdraw forces (YNA) from Bosnia-Herzegovina, and negotiate a settlement of the conflict.
Constrain the Yugoslav (Serbian) government from engaging in use of force against republics of the former SFRY and from providing logistical and military support for the Bosnian-Serb forces in BiH.
Signal norms against military aggression and ethnic cleansing. In the final stage, the sanctions aimed to coerce Bosnian Serbs to accept the territorial terms of the proposed settlement.
Comprehensive sanctions on the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro).
Sanctions imposition and termination repeatedly delayed. Suspension of sanctions authorized for a limited time period and repeatedly extended, arms imports embargo terminated in phases. Sanctions Committee in place, no sanctions monitoring mechanism. Designation criteria were specified and targets designated. Enforcement authorities specified.
Hostilities ceased and a negotiated settlement was achieved, but not on the terms as originally specified in UNSCR 757 (much delay on the part of the Milosevic government).
The Milosevic regime agreed to close border with Bosnian-Serbs, participate in negotiations and endorse various peace agreements for Bosnia-Herzegovina to a large extent in response to the possibility of relaxation of UN sanctions (signaled by the relaxation of transport, sport and culture sanctions in September 1994). Sanctions appear to have reinforced other measures (such as use of military force, intense and high-level diplomatic activity).
Major increases in costs to FRY (in terms of economic decline), changes in strategy of target (gradual tactical distancing from Bosnian Serbs beginning in early 1994, nearly complete border closure by September 1994).
The cumulative impact of comprehensive sanctions contributed to economic collapse, social unrest, and limited the options of the regime. Collapse of FRY economy made it difficult to sustain economic and military support for Bosnian-Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Norms against aggression, but primarily ethnic cleansing, were clearly articulated and the target (Milosevic regime) was both strongly stigmatized and isolated diplomatically for its support for the Bosnian-Serbs in the conflict ongoing in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Sanctions appear to have been the most significant factor in signaling the regime, but there was also intense diplomatic activity and a strong international coalition mobilized against the regime; the actions of the regime itself contributed to its stigmatization. Threat of ICTY indictments against Yugoslav (Serbian) officials added to signaling and stigmatization.
Increase in corruption and criminality, strengthening of authoritarian rule, rally round the flag effect, increase in human rights violation, harmful effects in neighboring states, strengthening political factions, increase in international enforcement capacity in different issue domains, resource diversion, humanitarian consequences, reduction of local institutional capacity, widespread harmful economic consequences.