Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Burundi

Background

Before its revocation, the executive order targeting those contributing to the situation in Burundi primarily aimed to curtail activities threatening the region's stability by exerting financial pressure. Through its provisions, the order directed the blocking of property and interests in property of individuals and entities assessed to be destabilizing Burundi—actions justified by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Critical impacts included the restriction on transferring, paying, or otherwise dealing with the assets of designated persons or entities, effectively cutting them off from the U.S. financial system. These measures presented severe financial constraints, curbing the ability of identified individuals or groups to engage in international trade or financial transactions linked to the U.S. or facilitated by U.S.-linked financial entities.

The Treasury Department, particularly through the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), was at the forefront of enforcing these restrictions. OFAC was tasked with identifying individuals and groups whose actions met the criteria set forth in the order—namely, those engaging in human rights abuses, undermining democratic processes, or threatening peace and security. This required close coordination with the State Department to ensure that decisions about sanctions were consistent with broader U.S. foreign policy objectives. The blocked list was regularly updated, reflecting ongoing assessments as the situation in Burundi evolved, and requiring financial institutions to ensure compliance to avoid penalties.

The social policies influenced by the executive order extended to immigration and entry restrictions against specific individuals deemed harmful to U.S. interests due to their role in the crisis. The order mandated the suspension of both immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States for these individuals, tightly intertwining with established practices under the Immigration and Nationality Act. Such policies sought to uphold a narrative of accountability, exerting diplomatic pressure while also visibly supporting international human rights norms. Over time, this contributed to shaping global perceptions of U.S. commitment to promoting democracy and stability in conflict-prone regions.

Reason for Revocation

The decision by President Joe Biden to revoke the executive order against individuals contributing to the Burundi crisis can be understood as part of a broader shift in U.S. foreign policy towards Africa. Under the Biden administration, there has been a discernible pivot toward engaging more constructively with African nations. This entails not just punitive measures but also dialogues and partnerships aimed at fostering development and democratic institutions. Revoking the order likely signaled an intention to reopen diplomatic channels, strengthen bilateral relations, and promote stability through soft power rather than sanctions alone.

The political context surrounding the revocation reflects a shift in ideology underpinned by a global and multilateral approach to conflict resolution. By lifting such sanctions, the administration may have been seeking to illustrate a break from unilateral measures perceived as heavy-handed, particularly where multilateral or diplomatic opportunities existed. This approach aligns with broader Biden foreign policy themes that emphasize collaboration, international organizations' roles, and rebuilding U.S. alliances worldwide. Burundi's improvements in governance and stability, despite ongoing challenges, may have diminished the rationale for continued economic sanctions, making a reset palatable.

Additionally, the revocation acknowledges the potential limitations of sanctions in achieving desired political outcomes. Overreliance on economic restrictions can lead to entrenched resistance, unintended humanitarian impacts, or a disrupted local economy without necessarily resolving core political issues. Removing the order allowed for potentially more nuanced, targeted strategies—leveraging developmental aid and technical support to address root causes of instability, thereby fostering positive change in Burundi through incentivized cooperation rather than coercion.

It is also feasible that domestic pressures and new understandings of economic diplomacy informed this shift. The lifting of sanctions associated with the order allowed U.S. entities and corporations to explore renewing or beginning economic relationships beneficial both to American interests and regional growth, extending influence through market mechanisms rather than solely through direct governmental action.

Winners

Beneficiaries of the order's revocation likely include the Burundian government and regional business entities who can now engage more freely with U.S. markets and financial systems. This enhanced access can bolster Burundi's economic growth prospects, particularly critical as the nation seeks to rebuild and develop in the wake of its political crises. Newly accessible avenues for trade, investment, and international cooperation present opportunities for domestic companies to expand operations and create jobs, ultimately contributing to the broader economic integration of Burundi with global markets.

International businesses and investors, particularly those interested in Africa's emergent markets, stand to gain from the increased economic activity and stability facilitated by lifting the order's restrictive measures. Major corporations in the mining, agricultural, and communications sectors may see new opportunities in a less restricted Burundi, potentially leading to ventures that contribute to infrastructural development and access to natural resources with significant commercial value.

Burundian pop culture and civil society organizations may also benefit from a more favorable international environment. The lifting of travel restrictions and financial blacklisting allows for increased cultural exchanges, academic collaborations, and non-governmental organization activities that align with peacebuilding and education efforts. Renewed relations may additionally prompt an upsurge in international funding and support for community-driven projects pivotal in strengthening democratic tenets, civil rights advocacy, and grassroots peace initiatives.

Losers

The revocation of the executive order may negatively impact groups such as human rights watchdogs and international organizations focusing on accountability in Burundi, perceiving the move as a signal of decreased pressure on alleged perpetrator actors. These entities may argue that lifting economic penalties could diminish leverage over Burundi's government to monitor and improve practices related to human rights abuses or anti-democratic actions, which remain a concern for some advocates.

The imposition of sanctions was historically seen as a tool for amplifying local opposition efforts against authoritarian practices. Thus, local political opposition and dissident movements might view the U.S. decision as a diminution of international solidarity. They could struggle with reduced external validation or direct support, potentially making it more challenging to galvanize pressure for comprehensive political reform within Burundi.

Finally, there are economic actors or competitors within the region or globally who thrived under the sanctions regime due to limited foreign competition and engagement in the previously restricted Burundian market. These groups could face renewed competition and market shifts unfavorable to entities that capitalized on the economic dynamics fostered by the restrictions imposed by the U.S. orders.