"Doubts
Over Anti-Pipeline Claims"
26 November 1996, The Bangkok Post
Burma's Yadana pipeline project that will supply natural gas to Thailand
has been fraught with controversy. Boonsong Kositchotethana was recently
at the pipeline site in Mon state, southeast Burma, to follow up some
of the accusations made against the scheme.
"Commercial Diplomacy Aims To
Win Over Foes"
25 November 1996, Dallas Morning News, Commentary
Jim Landers, staff writer for international economic issues from the
Washington Bureau, argues that commercial gains have begun to greatly
outweigh military might as a measure of US influence around the globe.
Diplomats can no longer half-hazardly implement policy decisions oblivious
to the impact on US businesses.
"Haiti Offers A Stern Lesson
For Myanmar Sanctions Supporters"
28 October 1996, Asia Times, Commentary
Stephen Brookes offers the recent Haiti-Disney-Myanmar controversy as
a prime example of an inconsistent approach to sanctions policy. Additionally,
he looks at the similarities between sanctions levied against Haiti,
and those proposed for Myanmar.
"The Danger
Of Sanctions: They Can Hurt The People And Spare The Regime"
17 October 1996, The Boston Globe, Commentary
In the October issue of Foreign Policy, Franklin Lavin, director
of the Asia Pacific Policy Center, asserted that "trade sanctions
can function like a neutron bomb, destroying the economy, wreaking
misery on the general population but leaving the political establishment
intact." Powers, author of this article, discusses (within the context
of Lavin's assertion) the situation in the former Yugoslavia as well
as other geographic areas targeted for sanctions.
"Sanctions:
An Ineffective Tool of Diplomacy"
Fall 1996, Houston Business Review
"There are no less then 30 countries where the US is seeking to limit
commercial activity. Most of these are US unilateral sanctions, which
means the US is imposing economic sanctions on the offending country
without the support of other countries. When this occurs, business continues
in these countries -- with, or without us -- and as the international
city of the South, Houston should be concerned."
"Good Intentions
Gone Bad"
06 October 1996, The Washington Post, Commentary
Professor at the Industrial College of the Armed Forces in Washington,
Donald Losman outlines ten propositions on why sanctions, as they
stand, are ineffective and rarely attain their desired results. He
believes that most formal sanctions should be dropped from our foreign
policy strategies, explaining that "continuing trade does not necessarily
mean moral approval."
"Capitalism vs. Moralism In
Burma"
24 September 1996, Los Angeles Times, Commentary
With the military Junta ruling Myanmar in the world's human rights
spotlight, the recent pipeline venture by Unocal has come under tight
scrutiny. UCLA Professor Tom Plate outlines the controversy and offers
striking examples of sanctions inconsistencies, spotlighting Viet
Nam, China, and Cuba.
Other Nations Profit: Business
Chafes At Our Trade Sanctions
15 September 1996, Wilmington Star-News, Louis Uchitelle
"Trade sanctions have become ever more difficult to enforce in the
world's huge and fluid marketplace, but the United States is invoking
them with increasing frequency anyway. It is even adding an onerous
new twist: punishing foreign companies for breaching US sanctions."
"Who's Punishing
Whom? Trade Bans Are Boomerangs, US Companies Say"
11 September 1996, The New York Times, Commentary
Louis Uchitelle outlines examples of sanctions from 1962 until the
present, demonstrating the fact that the US is the most frequent user
of unilateral trade sanctions. Recently, under the auspices of the
National Foreign Trade Council, US businesses have become active players
in reforming sanctions use.
"Can Trade Buy Political Change?"
05 September 1996, The Christian Science Monitor, Commentary
"Any time we restrict trade, we lose exports we would otherwise make.
If the restriction works - if, for example, we slow the pace of nuclear
proliferation - we may think the price of lost exports is acceptable.
But if we never get the export market back - if the target country
finds other suppliers - we may see it in a different light. And if
the policy doesn't work, we lose both ways."
"If
Corporate Investment Disappears, So Does All US Influence"
27 August 1996, San José Mercury News, Commentary
Drawing on past results of trade sanctions levied by Congress in addition
to the fact that US trade accounts for less than ten percent of Myanmar's
total foreign trade, John Imle, Jr. (President, Unocal Corporation)
argues that if Congress mandates the withdrawal of all US investment
interests in Myanmar, a direct corellation is the decline of US influence
upon the military Junta.
"Why Unocal
Ignores Calls For Myanmar Sanctions"
13 August 1996, Asia Times, Interview
In an interview with Asia Times, John Imle, Jr. (President
of Unocal Corporation) outlines why sanctions will not hurt Myanmar,
his company's role in Myanmar, and the future of US trade sanctions.
"Second Thoughts
On Sanctions"
09 August 1996, Asiaweek, Commentary
"In six nations freedom has made great strides: Bangladesh, Pakistan,
the Philippines, Korea, Taiwan and Thailand. Yet, none of these were
subjected to trade sanctions. How should the US respond to Myanmar
and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi's continued request that foreign entities
withdraw financially from her country?"
"Backlash Will
Hurt US: Sanctions Historically Haven't Worked"
07 August 1996, USA Today, Commentary
"In an apparent attempt to look tough internationally, the Clinton
administration has used, and threatened to use, sanctions against
just about everyone. And for just about every reason: to promote democracy
(Burma, Haiti), fight drugs (Colombia), oust a communist dictator
(Cuba), enforce nuclear nonproliferation (Iraq, North Korea), promote
human rights (China), and settle a civil war (Yugoslavia). In none
of these cases have sanctions and threatened sanctions yielded much
benefit."
"Stop The Sanctions
Game"
23 July 1996, Journal of Commerce, Commentary
"The law of unintended consequences can apply with a vengeance to any
move that links trade with human rights." US corporations, writes Stuart
Anderson, act as a "liberating force", strengthening the private sector
and creating "subtle but important pressures" which encourage reform
among the elite of the government in question.
"Unthinking Critics...Or Undue
Sanctions?"
19 July 1996, The Washington Times, Commentary
"The Clinton administration's decision to suspend US lawsuits against
foreign companies involved with expropriated Cuban property does not
solve the key problems in the Helms-Burton legislation. The enforcement
of that law and similar laws is already harming American companies
and US commercial relations with our major trading partners."
"Every Which Way On Cuba"
19 July 1996, The Washington Times, Editorial
"Mr. Clinton didn't have to sign the bill into law. Indeed, he was
hardly expected to sign the bill when it was first proposed by Sen.
Jesse Helms and Rep. Dan Burton."
"Bright Light
In Burma"
11 July 1996, Orange County Register, Editorial
In this Editorial column, the Register applauds the increased
domestic visibility and popular support which 1991 Nobel Peace Prize
laureate Aung San Suu Kyi has gained. She withdrew from a recent SLORC
convention in favor of writing her own constitution with her democracy
party. The US should modify the Senate Bill 1511 "cutting out the
sanctions, but retaining the condemnation of the dictatorship."
"Punishing The
Wrong Party"
27 May 1996, The Washington Post, Commentary
Britain's Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs responds
to a Washington Post Editorial which was critical of US allies
who disagreed with US unilateral trade sanctions, including Helms-Burton.
Return to Top