NEGATIVE/ROGUES/GENERAL

SANCTION SYSTEM HAS BEEN A HUGE SUCCESS

SANCTIONS ARE EMPIRICALLY THE MOST EFFECTIVE OPTION EVEN IF NOT PERFECT

HOWARD BREMBECK, Fourth Freedom Foundation, 2000; IN SEARCH OF THE FOURTH FREEDOM // VT2002 acs p. 111-112

Even with the inconsistent, fragmented and often inept incentives and sanctions efforts of the post-World War I and Cold War eras, the record is far more positive than many critics would have us believe. The Washington- based Institute for International Economics has studied 116 sanctions episodes between 1914 and 19go, carefully analyzing goals and results. The conclusion: 34 percent of the sanctions were successful in achieving their declared goals. The success rate compares favorably with that achieved through the use of military force but with less direct cost and without the slaughter, destruction and hatred that are inevitable consequences of military action.

An objective review of the evidence should demonstrate to even the most skeptical observer that international sanctions -carefully conceived, adequately supported and implemented with an even handhave worked in the past and, with the cooperation of the world community, will work in the future.

SANCTIONS MUST REMAIN A POLICY OPTION

Aryeh Neier, president of the Open Society Institute. January 28, 2001, The New York Times SECTION: Section 4; Page 15; HEADLINE: Sanctions Are a Weapon We Need //VT2002acsln

With some 75 countries currently subject to a host of international sanctions -- from bans on air travel to withdrawal of trade preferences, for offenses ranging from narcotics trafficking to mislabeling consumer products -- it is easy to sympathize with the secretary's concerns. But it would be a mistake to abandon sanctions in situations where there are no ready substitutes, as in the promotion of international human rights.

WITHOUT SANCTIONS, USA WILL HAVE TO USE WAR TO GET ITS WAY

Jesse Helms; Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Foreign Affairs January, 1999 / February, 1999; Pg. 2 HEADLINE: What Sanctions Epidemic?; U.S. Business' Curious Crusade //lnu-acs

Jefferson is right. There are, indeed, three tools in foreign policy: diplomacy, sanctions, and war. Take away sanctions and how can the United States deal with terrorists, proliferators, and genocidal dictators? Our options would be empty talk or sending in the marines. Without sanctions, the United States would be virtually powerless to influence events absent war. Sanctions may not be perfect and they are not always the answer, but they are often the only weapon.

UNILATERAL USA ECONOMIC SANCTIONS HAVE IMPRESSIVE RECORD OF SUCCESS

Jesse Helms; Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Foreign Affairs January, 1999 / February, 1999; Pg. 2 HEADLINE: What Sanctions Epidemic?; U.S. Business' Curious Crusade //lnu-acs

U.S. sanctions helped bring down the Soviet Union. They played a pivotal role in forcing communist Poland to release political prisoners and legalize Solidarity -- sparking the collapse of communism. Our targeted Nigerian sanctions are beginning to bear fruit as the military government wearies of its pariah status. In Guatemala, the decision to freeze $ 47 million in U.S. aid (one of the "sanctions" that business is lobbying to curtail) and the mere threat of lost trade convinced business, labor, and military leaders to roll back President Jorge Serrano Elias' May 1993 coup. Swiss banks' recent decision to pay $ 1.25 billion in reparations to Holocaust survivors was a direct result of threatened sanctions, as admitted by the Union Bank of Switzerland.

CURRENT ECONOMIC SANCTIONS POLICY PROCESS IS SOLID AND SHOULD BE KEPT

Jesse Helms; Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Foreign Affairs January, 1999 / February, 1999; Pg. 2 HEADLINE: What Sanctions Epidemic?; U.S. Business' Curious Crusade //lnu-acs

Congress already has a system for considering U.S. economic sanctions. It is called congressional debate. Each sanctions law is considered carefully, every provision is debated openly, and varying levels of flexibility are written into the law. Business gets a chance to weigh in, as do other constituencies. In the end, the president can veto any law. And Congress can always go back and amend sanctions if necessary -- as it just did with India and Pakistan. The system the Founders established to decide such matters works just fine. It does not need "reform" inspired by a "sanctions epidemic" fabricated in some Washington lobbying firm's offices.

ECONOMIC SANCTIONS ARE JUSTIFIED AGAINST REGIMES WHICH COMMIT FOUL CRIMES AND THREATEN PEACE

Jesse Helms; Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Foreign Affairs January, 1999 / February, 1999; Pg. 2 HEADLINE: What Sanctions Epidemic?; U.S. Business' Curious Crusade //lnu-acs

U.S. policies should isolate terrorist regimes like Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Cuba. U.S. aid should not go to countries that commit genocide, harbor war criminals, support terrorism, or export illegal drugs that poison American children. Lethal weapons should not be sold to violent regimes in Nigeria and Sudan; assets of drug traffickers should be seized; imports from Chinese companies that use prison slave labor should be banned; and government procurement contracts should not be given to foreign companies that sell dangerous technologies to terrorist states. There should be sanctions on companies and governments that proliferate nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and countries that murder women and children and pile them into mass graves. America should not hesitate for one second to place a cost on these reprehensible acts and to restrain those few American companies who would actually conduct business with the perpetrators of such heinous crimes.

US SANCTIONS ACT TO INFLUENCE THE NUCLEAR BEHAVIOR OF SO-CALLED "ROGUE" NATIONS

JANE PERLEZ, The New York Times, October 15, 1999, SECTION: Section A; Page 12; HEADLINE: DEFEAT OF A TREATY: THE ARMS EXPERTS; A Nuclear Safety Valve Is Shut Off, but U.S. Maintains Other Safeguards // ln-10-29-99-acs

In a speech in July, the Administration's senior arms control official, John D. Holum, acting Under Secretary of State for arms control, listed seven major elements in the Administration's policy, starting with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty of the 1960's and the recent test ban treaty. He mentioned inducements to North Korea that include $40 million a year in fuel from the United States and the building of two power plants financed by South Korea and Japan in exchange for a freeze by Pyongyang on its plutonium production.

He also mentioned sanctions, which in the 90's have been imposed as punishment for bad nuclear behavior or lifted as a reward for improved conduct. Of sanctions, Mr. Holum acknowledged that "nobody likes them much." And he cited intrusive inspections of nuclear plants that are being carried out by the International Atomic Energy Agency.