It's not exactly my area of research.
I think that Professor Charron had her finger on the fact that when we think about enforcement, there tends to be this sort of focus on whether there are prosecutions, yet that sort of misses the point that sanctions often have their effectiveness in the way in which, for example, financial institutions refuse to process transactions or lawyers advise their clients not to engage in certain trade. Sanctions can actually have quite a profound effect, even without any evidence that the law enforcement is actually prosecuting anyone for violation of sanctions, so you'd have to do a lot more granular research to determine whether in fact the sanctions are being violated in a way that would require prosecution.
In terms of the international perception, the thing that has been getting the most attention—from my perspective, when I'm at conferences where both legal scholars and law and policy experts are convening—is Canada's suggestion that it may start expropriating assets as opposed to just freezing assets. People are thinking that Canada is actually way out in front of everybody else, perhaps not in a good way, in terms of pushing the boundaries of international law with respect to expropriation.