What's the point in UN sanctions for Islamic State Brits?
It certainly made for a powerful headline: Britain has put four of its own citizens - jihadists who have travelled to live under so-called Islamic State - onto a United Nations sanctions list.
But what was the point?
Was the government trying to expose the jihadists? Unlikely. These are already well-known recruits who have featured heavily in media reports over the past few months.
Sally-Anne Jones, 46, a former punk band guitarist, who has apparently responded to the news about sanctions with a ‘LOL’ on Twitter.
Aqsa Mahmood, 21, who has been accused of recruiting three London schoolgirls to join IS.
Omar Hussain, 28, a former supermarket worker who recently used social media to brag about having access to Ferrero Rocher chocolates in Syria
Nasser Muthana, 21, from Cardiff, who featured prominently in an IS recruitment video last year.
Perhaps the government’s aim was to ‘disrupt’ the four British extremists.
But unless any had the intention of travelling outside Syria, of using a cashpoint or of online banking, the restrictions attached are unlikely to make much difference to their lives now.
In light of the news that RAF drone strikes killed two British citizens in Syria last month, this announcement might have sounded like the other half of a tough twin-pack attack. But they’re incomparable. The UN sanctions are an act of symbolism.
More significant is what this all says about Britain's attitude towards those recruits who might eventually want to return to the UK. Will the imposition of sanctions dissuade reformed militants from coming back?
But in an environment where Britain is prepared to launch drone strikes against its citizens in Syria, the possibility of financial and travel sanctions will surely seem like no threat at all.