[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 4]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 5655-5656]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   COMMON SENSE APPROACH TO SANCTIONS

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. PHILIP M. CRANE

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, March 24, 1999

  Mr. CRANE. Mr. Speaker, today, I am pleased to join with so many of 
my colleagues on a bipartisan basis in reintroducing legislation, the 
``Enhancement of Trade, Security, and Human Rights through Sanctions 
Reform Act,'' intended to establish a common sense procedural framework 
for consideration of future U.S. unilateral sanctions.
  Sanctions reform is necessary because the proliferation of unilateral 
economic sanctions is causing lasting damage to America's reputation as 
a reliable supplier in the global marketplace. It is estimated that 
U.S. sanctions cost $15 to $19 billion annually in lost U.S. exports 
and over 200,000 high-wage U.S. jobs.
  Moreover, experience has shown us that unilateral sanctions don't 
work. A wide variety

[[Page 5656]]

of leading U.S. foreign policy experts, think tanks, and government 
studies have concluded that unilateral sanctions are costly and 
counter-productive, particularly in a global economy, where technology, 
capital equipment, financing, and farm commodities are freely available 
from U.S. competitors.
  Last year, the Glenn Amendment, which required the President to 
impose sanctions in response to India and Pakistan's nuclear tests, 
showed the weakness of relying on unilateral sanctions as an all-
purpose foreign policy tool. The threat of sanctions, which were U.S. 
law prior to the testing, failed to deter India or Pakistan from 
conducting their tests, but would have cost the United States a major 
wheat sale if Congress had not intervened last year to grant the 
President waiver authority.
  The legislation I am introducing today seeks responsible reform of 
the decision making process associated with U.S. unilateral sanctions. 
The bill's primary goal is to ensure that Congress and the 
Administration have better information for more informed decision-
making on sanctions bills and initiatives.
  Before imposing a unilateral sanction, the bill requires Congress and 
the President to request relevant information and address certain 
common-sense questions. Among them are the following. Is the proposed 
unilateral sanction likely to be effective? Is the sanction aimed at a 
clearly-defined and realistic objective? What are the economic costs 
for American industry and agriculture? Will the sanction undermine 
other U.S. security, foreign policy, and humanitarian objectives, such 
as relations with our key U.S. allies? Have potential alternatives, 
such as multilateral sanctions or diplomatic initiatives, been tried 
and failed?
  My colleagues and I who are sponsoring this legislation today intend 
to work quickly to move the legislation through the legislative 
process. Without the information that this bill would provide us about 
future sanctions, we risk taking action that is not in our interest and 
has a very small chance of success. This bill is about establishing 
effective procedures that will lead to effective results in the way we 
respond to behavior by nations with which we have concerns. I urge my 
colleagues to support this important legislation.

                          ____________________