Sanctions are a coercive tool designed to raise costs and push a state toward changing its behavior. Since 2014, Western measures against Russia have targeted key levers of its economy—especially finance and energy—making it harder for Moscow to access capital, finance its activities, and obtain technology for its oil and gas sector. The goal is to squeeze revenue and constrain operating capacity, which in turn deters further aggression by increasing the political and economic costs of those actions. At the same time, sanctions express a unified international stance, reinforcing deterrence by showing that allies will coordinate consequences. Cultural exchange (not a punitive aim), boosting the energy sector (the opposite of what sanctions do), and granting UN Security Council membership (unrelated to coercive measures) don’t fit the purpose or mechanism of these sanctions.

Treaties are the formal backbone that gives international organizations their binding authority. They are formal agreements that bind member states to specific obligations and standards, laying out what states must do, what they are allowed to do, and how the organization will implement and enforce those rules. Because states ratify treaties, the rules carry legal force under international law and provide a clear framework for cooperation, accountability, and dispute resolution. This binding nature also helps legitimize the organization’s actions: with agreed-upon rules, members have a predictable, shared baseline for collective action, compliance is monitored, and violations can be addressed through established mechanisms, including international courts or dispute settlements. Examples like the UN Charter establishing purposes and duties related to peace and security, or environmental and trade treaties that set concrete commitments and procedures, illustrate how treaties translate collective aims into enforceable norms. In contrast, informal understandings, domestic-only provisions, or narrow data-sharing agreements do not offer the same universal, legally binding framework that enables sustained international cooperation.

Chapter VII of the UN Charter is the part that authorizes the Security Council to determine when a threat to peace exists and to take collective measures to maintain or restore international peace and security, up to and including the use of armed force. This creates a framework of collective security where action is taken by the international community under a unified mandate rather than by individual states acting alone, and it also sets sovereignty within a system that allows enforcement by the Security Council when threats are identified. The other provisions, while important, do not provide this dual mechanism: Article 2(4) establishes a general prohibition on force except when authorized, the Preamble outlines purposes and principles, and Article 51 recognizes the right of self-defense but does not establish the broad, Security Council–led collective response.

NGOs in international relations illustrate how non-state actors influence global politics by addressing issues, advocating for human rights, and delivering humanitarian aid. They connect people across borders to spotlight global problems, push governments and international bodies to act, and mobilize resources and expertise where gaps exist. This combination of issue advocacy, monitoring, and on-the-ground assistance helps shape international agendas, inform policy decisions, and hold actors accountable through visibility and expertise. While NGOs can influence how states and intergovernmental organizations respond, they do not regulate international bodies, impose sanctions, or displace state sovereignty. Their power is persuasive, collaborative, and humanitarian in nature, not coercive authority over states.