Robert Torricelli: “this issue has now been debated at great length. And having listened to so many of my colleagues, for my own part, I…”

“this issue has now been debated at great length. And having listened to so many of my colleagues, for my own part, I wanted only to respond to several things that have been said and then leave the issue with the Senate. It is being suggested that somehow the idea of economic sanctions is some aberration of policy, inconsistent with our values, inappropriate in the final years of the 20th century. I want to remind my colleagues that the American effort to impose economic sanctions began with Woodrow Wilson, after the Great War, as an alternative to military conflict. So many lives had been lost and the war was so senseless that we began this 20th century with a commitment that this was the better alternative. I don't believe that Members of this Senate have been dissuaded from that view, given the outrageous conduct by terrorist states and facing the choice of military attack or expressing our outrage by separating them out of the international trading community. Sanctions are the better choice. Contrary to the statements of my friend, the Senator from Nebraska, the record is replete that they do succeed. How many Soviet Jews would have left Russia had it not been for Jackson-Vanik? What cooperation would we have had from Vietnam in finding POW crash sites if it hadn't been for sanctions? Where would North Korea had been now in stopping the development of atomic weapons if not for sanctions?”