ntal non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the Clinton administration has opposed the provision of competitive export financing through the Ex-Im Bank, citing concerns about the adverse environmental effects, human rights violations, and economic consequences. American companies have thus been left out of the game. The decision has sparked considerable criticismfrom U.S. executives who argue that while theproject is controversial, not only is the dam beingbuilt, but it is proceeding ahead of schedule. If bidsby American firms were approved by the Chinesegovernment, they say, $1 billion of exports to theproject would generate over 19,000 Americanjobs and assure entry into the booming Chinesemarket for U.S. companies. In the meantime, thesejobs are going to foreign competitors. By notparticipating, execu tives argue, the United States is not only losing thousands of American jobs, but also the opportunity to mitigate the negative aspects of the dam. Moreover, they complain that the Chinese market, already one of the world’s most competitive, is made more so for American companies because the U.S. government does not always separate political from commercial considerations. On the other hand, backers of the administration’s decision argue that the United States has the moral obligation to stand up for the environment and human rights. They also argue that the withholding of economic benefits is the quickest, and sometimes only, way to get the attention of uncooperative foreign governments, even in cases where the outcome appears futile. Questions Raised Since this is the first attempt to build a dam of this magnitude, different opinions regarding the benefits, duration, and cost of the construction have been formulated. On the one hand, it is obvious that the construction of the dam will result in the flooding of a sizable area of land, including entire villages and historical sites. On the other hand, proponents of the dam ...
