VOTING INSTRUCTION FOR A/C.2/62/L.8, UNILATERAL

UNCLAS STATE 168387

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: AORC EAID ECON PHUM UNGA
SUBJECT: VOTING INSTRUCTION FOR A/C.2/62/L.8, UNILATERAL
ECONOMIC MEASURES AS A MEANS OF POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC
COERCION AGAINST DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

REF: STATE 157330


1. This is an action request.


2. USUN is instructed to call for a vote and vote NO on the
following resolution in the UNGA plenary: A/C.2/62/L.8,
"Unilateral economic measures as a means of political and
economic coercion against developing countries".


3. USUN should draw from the following language to provide an
explanation of vote:

"The United States opposes this resolution. Every state has
the sovereign power to restrict or cut off trade or other
commerce with particular nations when the state believes it
is in its national economic or security interest to do so.
The suggestion that there is any international legal
prohibition against such a right is, at best, fatuous. That
is why so many countries have abstained from supporting this
resolution today.

Sanctions are specifically provided for under the UN Charter
because the framers saw them as an effective, generally
interim, targeted measure that, as part of a broader
diplomatic and political strategy, can help the international
community restore peace and security without resort to the
use of force. Sanctions should not be used in all cases and
must be carefully calibrated to achieve their objectives. In
some instances, sanctions are designed to pressure a state to
return to generally accepted international norms, such as
democracy and rule of law. In other instances, sanctions
such as arms embargoes, prohibitions on access to nuclear
materials, and others, play a critical role in denying states
the tools they need to engage in harmful acts that threaten
international peace and security.

Member States must admit, if only to themselves, that this
resolution is actually aimed at undermining the international
community's ability to respond effectively to acts that -- by
their very nature and enormity -- are offensive to genuine
international norms, such as human rights, democracy, and
rule of law. There must be a consequence for such actions
lest the offending states have no incentive or reason to
abandon them. Economic sanctions -- whether multilateral or
unilateral -- can be and in fact have been effective means to
achieve legitimate foreign policy objectives. For example,
they have cut financial flows to corrupt powers involved in
human rights violations and have also led to a regime's
choice to give up nuclear weapons ambitions.

My government is not prepared to concede that sanctions are
not a legitimate and effective tool of statecraft. This
resolution will do nothing to change that view."
RICE