23 May 1997
The Journal of Commerce
Editorial

Fictitious enemies

U.S. national security is under such an "unusual and extraordinary threat" that President Clinton earlier this week declared a state of "national emergency" to deal with it. Yet unlike the procedures followed in real, national emergencies, there were no prior consultations with Congress or with NATO allies, no strategic meetings in the Pentagon, no general mobilization and no call to arms to defend Old Glory.

None of that was needed. The enemy "threatening" the United States is Myanmar, formerly Burma; the supposed national emergency is its junta's violation of human rights. To deal with this "extraordinary threat," Mr. Clinton ordered a halt to all new investment in Myanmar. The threat to the United States is bogus, and the president's response to it will do more harm than good.

Declaring a national emergency for similar purposes has become something of a habit with this administration. Since 1993, the president has invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act 37 times, imposing unilateral trade sanctions on 31 countries. Among those countries posing the biggest threat to America's national security are Nicaragua, Haiti and Montenegro.

In other circumstances, Congress, especially a Congress controlled by the opposition, would howl that declaring national emergencies without prior consultations for the purpose of slapping indiscriminate, unilateral economic sanctions on a foreign country amounts to gross abuse of presidential powers. And the charge would be absolutely right.

But in this case, invoking a legal fiction against Myanmar fulfilled the wishes of a congressional majority. Congress, like the president, is inclined to score cheap politcal points by voting for trade sanctions even against our best friends, including Canada and Western Europe.

The downside of imposing unilateral sanctions ‹ and there are 61 of them outstanding according to USA Engage, a business coalition formed to stop the proliferation of sanctions ‹ is enormous and well-known. Unilateral sanctions never work and end up punishing U.S. companies far more severely than the regimes they are trying to undermine.

But there is another, potentially more sinister consequence of Mr. Clinton's arbitrary practice. It hands the many congressional opponents of normal relations with Beijing an easy argument in their quest to revoke China's most-favored-nation trading status.

If human rights violations are a sufficient reason for U.S. economic reprisals against dozens of countries, they argue, why shouldn't they be a good enough reason to end MFN for China? Of course, there is an element of truth in that. Mr. Clinton, having repeatedly disregarded the law, abandoned principle and ignored the bad economics of unilateral trade sanctions, is on shaky logical ground to argue that China's trading privileges should he extended because sanctions don't cure human rights abuses.

Meanwhile, Congress, which is gearing up for a heated debate on trade relations with China in the coming weeks, is invoking a legal fiction of its own. Judging by the vehement declarations in Congress, the MFN debate is shaping up to be a political free-for-all on issues ranging from trade protection and human rights violations to China's threat in eastern Asia and undue attempts to influence American politics.

Yet, under the Jackson-Vanik amendment, which serves as the legal basis for the annual ritual of renewing China's trading status, the only issue before Congress is whether Beijing has a sufficiently liberal emigration policy. Under that law and Mr. Clinton's own 1994 executive order, the MFN renewal is not tied to China's human rights record, much less to its trade balance with the United States or attempts, however inappropriate, to buy influence in Washington.

Washington must stop playing political football with trade. It is not only self-defeating, it's downright unlawful.

  Return to Top

Home |  About Us |  Resources |  Press Releases |  Federal Activity & Legislation
State & Local Activity |  NFTC Lawsuit |  Contact Us |  Site Index