17 September 1997
Chicago Sun-Times
Editorial

Think before sanctioning

In child-rearing, punishment generally is considered effective only when it results in the desired behavioral changes. So it should be in international relations as well.

Sen. Richard Lugar (R) and Rep. Lee Hamilton (D), both from Indiana, want to ensure that will be the case. They plan to introduce a bill to require Congress to stop and ponder its actions before imposing unilateral economic SANCTIONS. In short, lawmakers would have to consider whether the SANCTIONS are likely to produce the desired effect, or simply will serve to give foreign competitors a leg up on American firms.

Consider, for example, a Heritage Foundation analysis of the embargo on U.S. grain exports to the Soviet Union levied as punishment for the 1980 invasion of Afghanistan. U.S. grain exports to the Soviet Union fell from 25 million metric tons to 8 million metric tons, while Soviet grain imports rose from 31 million metric tons to 40 million metric tons. Argentina, Canada and several European countries had jumped in to take over the market. A year later, the embargo was declared a failure and lifted -- but not before U.S. farmers lost $ 2.3 billion.

It is easy to understand why lawmakers are quick to impose economic SANCTIONS in reaction to some international wrong. It gives the appearance they are concerned and ready to act, without the political fallout that would accompany dispatching troops. Unlike military intervention, no American lives are risked by economic SANCTIONS. But American livelihoods are. The Institute for International Economics estimates that in 1995, economic SANCTIONS reduced U.S. exports to 26 countries by as much as $ 19 billion and eliminated 200,000 jobs.

The Lugar-Hamilton bill asks lawmakers to consider the effect of future SANCTIONS to ensure they are more likely to harm the offending country than a U.S. business. The bill deserves a fair hearing, but that is not likely to happen given the fondness for SANCTIONS displayed by Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.), ruler of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Even if the Lugar-Hamilton bill never passes, members of Congress still could apply its rules of common sense to future requests for unilateral economic SANCTIONS. A good first test would be the pending Freedom from RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION Act of 1997. Its sponsors have their hearts in the right place; they want other countries to have the same religious freedom Americans enjoy. But should they buy that freedom with American jobs? Will the bill accomplish its goal? If the answer to either question is no, the bill should not pass.

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

.