Unocal in Myanmar – Myanmar’s Military Position Paper
Essay Preview: Unocal in Myanmar – Myanmar’s Military Position Paper
Report this essay
case position memorandumto:Unocal upper managementfrom:subject:unocal in myanmar (Burma)date:February 2, 2017cc:Dr. SmithGiven the record of human rights violations committed by Myanmar’s military, I recommend you, Unocal’s management, to not invest in countries or companies that do not promote, respect, protect and fulfill human rights. Your company, Unocal, decided to invest in a gas pipeline from Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, to Thailand, despite your knowledge of Myanmar’s military dictatorship reputation for violating the human rights of the villagers from Myanmar’s Tenasserim region. Therefore, I agree with the plaintiffs allegations that your decision to invest in the pipeline was wrong and that your company is morally responsible for the injuries and deaths of those individuals involved in the Myanmar gas pipeline project. Your company, Unocal, was attracted to the natural gas field that belonged to Myanmar due to Myanmar’s cheap and relatively educated labor, abundant natural gas resources, and entry point into other international markets, particularly in and around Southeast Asia. The only real problem with the project was the government of Myanmar, known for their partnership with the military and for continuously violating human rights of their own people. This made it extremely risky for your company to get involved in international business in Myanmar. Knowing all of these claims, you hired a consulting firm, the Control Risk Group, to assess the risk of the situation. Despite the negative feedback received from the consultants, you decided to invest in the project. You felt that the benefits to yourself and the people of Burma and Thailand outweighed the risks.
Your actions may not have been driven by bath faith, but I believe that you had been negligent for failing to calculate the costs of injuries and human rights violations. Your cost/benefit analysis was probably distorted to simply evaluating the potential profits your company might earn in the pipeline project instead of evaluating the social benefits against the harm done to the Myanmar citizens resulting from the project. Therefore, I believe that Unocal was mistaken for choosing to invest in Myanmar, a developing country with oppressive and disobedient government because it is simply impossible to do business in such countries without directly supporting their unprincipled governments, and their pervasive human rights violations. Therefore, it is difficult to imagine that Unocal would have been able to conduct their business in neutrality when it is committed to a legal contract with a partner that serves the interest of the military regime it represents.