Big Payoffs in ‘Carrot Diplomacy’

The Vietnamese, America’s archenemies 25 years ago, gave President Clinton a rousing reception during his just-completed three-day visit, a handsome reward for his policy of engagement that led to the lifting of economic sanctions, the resumption of diplomatic ties and a comprehensive trade agreement. His engaging of China also yielded major benefits--the overhaul of economic ties with the United States and Beijing’s commitment to economic reforms. Clearly, working with governments whose policies the United States doesn’t like produces better results than punishing them with trade embargoes. Washington should try that on Cuba and Iran as well.

The economic embargo against Cuba is a relic of Cold War days when diplomacy was aimed at containment of the enemy. It was designed to isolate Fidel Castro in some vague hope that this would undermine his regime. Instead, it has isolated the United States from the rest of the world. Recently in the United Nations, only two of 170 countries sided with Washington on the Cuba sanctions.

Clinton is a relative newcomer to incentives-based diplomacy. In his early years in office, he signed laws imposing, by one count, more than 60 sanctions. Among those measures was the Helms-Burton law, which exposed to American litigation any company doing business in Cuba. Wisely, he never allowed the most draconian provisions of that law to take effect.

The dissolution of ideological blocs and the advent of economic globalization offer new opportunities for America’s engagement policy. The promise of assistance, in addition to producing strides in bilateral relations with China and Vietnam, has opened a crack in North Korea’s isolationist policy. These countries are far from democratic, but they are less dangerous to global security when engaged in a dialogue than they were in isolation. Clinton’s successor would do well to continue on this path, brandishing carrots, not just big sticks.