{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019653179190751446, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.462686567164179, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Member States Resistance to EU Foreign Policy Sanctions

European Union (EU) sanctions are agreed in the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), a framework where the unanimity rule prevails and where individual Member States have a formal veto. Thus, Member State compliance with sanctions can be expected to be optimal: If Member States have serious objections to the imposition of sanctions, they can veto their adoption in the Council. Yet, while implementation is comparatively satisfactory, Member States have availed of opportunities to undermine the application of EU sanctions regimes at various levels. On the basis of the theoretical framework provided by Saurugger and Terpan, the present article explores various ways in which Member States attempt to resist EU measures, categorizes them and explains Member States’ choice of resistance techniques.