Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 February 2017
The failure of the U.S.-led embargo against Haiti had become notorious long before the time President Clinton decided to invade Haiti in order to restore President Aristide to office. The embargo had failed to unseat the junta and it had worked enormous hardship on the poor people of Haiti—so much so that thousands were willing to risk their lives on the high seas in makeshift vessels to seek asylum in the United States. This comment deals not with the legalities of the President’s action—which seem clear enough in view of the Security Council resolutions—but, rather, with the political consequences of the economic embargo in Haiti as well as elsewhere.
1 Fruehauf Corp. v. Massardy, Ct. App. Paris, [1965] 2 Gazette du Palais 86, 5 ILM 476 (1966).
2 Compagnie Européenne des Pétroles v. Sensor Nederland B.V., Dist. Ct. The Hague, 1982 Rechtspraak van de Week 167, 22 ILM 66 (1983), summarized in 77 AJIL 636 (1983).
3 Economist, Nov. 20, 1982, at 20.