[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 79 (Wednesday, June 17, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1151]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




            TIME TO RECONSIDER DESTRUCTIVE EMBARGO POLICIES

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. RON PAUL

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 17, 1998

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I have long held that the real victims of U.S. 
trade policy, and specifically of our various trade embargoes, are 
American citizens who hope to sell goods abroad, most especially our 
agricultural producers. The intended victims of sanctions are corrupt 
foreign rulers but they always find a way to get goods from our 
competitors and when they fail to do so they simply pass along any 
suffering to their internal political opponents.
  But, as I said, somebody is negatively affected. A recent issue of 
the American Farm Bureau Federation's ``Farm Bureau News'' contains a 
headline story which does a fabulous job of explaining how these 
embargoes adversely affect our American Farmers and Ranchers. In this 
front page story the Farm Bureau News masterfully details the true 
impact of trade embargoes.
  Mr. Speaker, I am proud to represent a very rural, agriculturally-
based district. My constituents are well aware of the importance of 
opening export markets for America's agricultural producers. Mr. 
Speaker, at this time I would like to place in the Record this story 
from the Farm Bureau News in hopes that people in the Administration, 
as well as in this Congress will begin to reconsider destructive 
embargo policies which only harm our nation's farmers and other 
producers including my constituents.

                  Ag Takes Biggest Hit From Embargoes

       Trade sanctions and embargoes for the purpose of social 
     reform or other reasons hurt American farmers and ranchers 
     more than any other sector of the economy, Farm Bureau told a 
     House Agriculture subcommittee last week.
       ``Farm Bureau strongly opposes all artificial trade 
     constraints such as embargoes or sanctions except in the case 
     of armed conflicts,'' said Ron Warfield, president of the 
     Illinois Farm Bureau. ``We believe that opening trading 
     systems around the world and engagement through trade are the 
     most effective means of reaching international economic 
     stability.''
       President Clinton imposed sanctions against India and 
     Pakistan after those countries detonated nuclear devices. 
     House Agriculture Committee Chairman Bob Smith (R-Ore.) and 
     ranking minority member Charlie Stenholm (D-Texas) have urged 
     Clinton to exempt food and agricultural commodities from 
     those sanctions. Pakistan is an important market for U.S. 
     agricultural products, ranking third in purchases of U.S. 
     wheat.
       Sens. Dick Lugar (R-Ind.), Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), Larry 
     Craig (R-Idaho) and Max Baucus (D-Mont.) have also asked 
     Clinton to exclude agricultural exports from the sanctions.
       Warfield, a member of the American Farm Bureau Federation 
     board of directors, told the panel that when sanctions are 
     imposed, agriculture typically bears the brunt through lost 
     sales and gains a reputation as an unreliable supplier. While 
     American agriculture loses through sanctions and embargoes, 
     its toughest competitors win by picking up those markets.
       Warfield noted that when the United States placed a grain 
     embargo against the Soviet Union in the 1980s, American 
     farmers lost $2.3 billion in farm exports. He said the 
     effects continue to be felt.
       ``When the United States cut off sales of wheat to protest 
     the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, other suppliers--France, 
     Canada, Australia and Argentina--stepped in,'' Warfield said. 
     ``They expanded their sales to the Soviet Union, ensuring 
     that U.S. sanctions had virtually no economic impact. Russia 
     still appears to restrict purchases of American wheat, 
     fearing the United States may again use food exports as a 
     foreign policy weapon.''
       Just the threat of sanctions can provoke trading partners 
     into a retaliatory stance and threaten U.S. agricultural 
     exports, the farm leader pointed out.
       Warfield said Farm Bureau supports a bill (H.R. 3654) by 
     Re. Tom Ewing (R-Ill.) that would prevent selective 
     agricultural embargoes. The legislation, he said, would 
     prevent useless embargoes that destroy American export 
     markets while creating opportunities for other countries. 
     Warfield said engagement with other nations, not sanctions 
     and embargoes, should be the preferred option.
       ``The United States, as the leader in world trade, has an 
     unprecedented opportunity to promote its values throughout 
     the world by peaceful engagement through trade,'' Warfield 
     said, ``Reaching out through engagement and trade, not 
     withdrawing behind embargoes, is the best way to achieve 
     positive change--not by denying ourselves access to the 
     markets and creating opportunities for our competitors.''

     

                          ____________________