IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v49y1995i01p105-137_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sanctions at bay? Hegemonic decline, multinational corporations, and U.S. economic sanctions since the pipeline case

Author

Listed:
  • Rodman, Kenneth A.

Abstract

One of the lessons drawn by many scholars from the 1982 U.S. sanctions against the Soviet-European gas pipeline was that the decline of American hegemony and the global spread of American business placed the overseas networks of U.S. multinational corporations beyond the control of the U.S. government for the purposes of economic sanctions. Through systematically examining three subsequent sanctions efforts (Nicaragua, Libya, and South Africa), this study qualifies the generalizability of this “lesson.” In none of the cases was the United States willing to incur alliance costs through applying extraterritorial controls, nor was it able to persuade American firms to substitute public preferences for private ones. Nonetheless, in each case, the U.S. government influenced corporate decision making by augmenting corporate perceptions of risk so that prudent business stategies reinforced diplomatic preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodman, Kenneth A., 1995. "Sanctions at bay? Hegemonic decline, multinational corporations, and U.S. economic sanctions since the pipeline case," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(1), pages 105-137, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:49:y:1995:i:01:p:105-137_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818300001594/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Seitz, William Hutchins, 2016. "Stock market reactions to conflict diamond trading restrictions and controversies," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 63-84, April.
    2. Ishva Minefee & Marcelo Bucheli, 2021. "MNC responses to international NGO activist campaigns: Evidence from Royal Dutch/Shell in apartheid South Africa," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(5), pages 971-998, July.
    3. Morad Bali & Thanh T. Nguyen & Lincoln F. Pratson, 2024. "Impacts of EU Sanctions Levied in 2014 on Individual European Countries' Exports to Russia: Winners and Losers," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 50(2), pages 154-194, April.
    4. James R. Hines, Jr., 1997. "Taxed Avoidance: American Participation in Unsanctioned International Boycotts," NBER Working Papers 6116, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. William Seitz, 2012. "Trade Restrictions and Conflict Commodities: Market reactions to regulations on conflict minerals from the Democratic Republic of the Congo," OxCarre Working Papers 102, Oxford Centre for the Analysis of Resource Rich Economies, University of Oxford.
    6. James Meernik, 1999. "Force and Influence in International Crises," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 17(1), pages 103-131, February.
    7. Seitz William Hutchins, 2016. "Stock market reactions to conflict diamond trading restrictions and controversies," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 18(1), pages 63-84, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:49:y:1995:i:01:p:105-137_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.