Export Control Act

• 1. Origins And Moral Embargo

  ›

  President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued a presidential proclamation in 1940 that forbade the export of aircraft parts, chemicals, and minerals without a license. This action aimed to induce Japan to curtail its occupation of the coast of Indochina. The United States government viewed this as a codified moral embargo following the Japanese bombing of civilians in mainland China during the late 1930s. US Secretary of State Cordell Hull condemned the slaughter in June 1938 and labeled it material encouragement for further aggression. A month later, the Department of State notified aircraft manufacturers that the government strongly opposed selling airplanes to nations attacking civilian populations. Diplomatic efforts failed to protect American lives and economic interests in China by 1939. America considered commercial retaliation against Japan after realizing its 1911 commercial treaty offered insufficient protection. Japan's status as a most favored nation legally prevented retaliatory measures under that treaty. The United States gave six months notice of withdrawal from the treaty in July 1939. This removal cleared the primary legal obstacle for imposing an embargo on trade.

  57

• 2. Escalation Toward War

  ›

  Controls first authorized in 1940 applied only to munitions and similar materials essential to defense efforts. The ban on oil and steel exports to Japan took effect between June and August of 1941. Expanding the embargo to include oil was specifically avoided initially because Japan depended heavily on US oil supplies. Officials feared that cutting off oil would be too provocative a step at that time. In September 1940, controls expanded to include iron and steel scrap exports. Japanese Ambassador Kensuke Horinouchi warned Secretary Hull on the 8th of October 1940, that this might be considered an unfriendly act. After the announcement, Horinouchi protested directly to Hull regarding the prohibition. Controls were extended in 1942 to cover all commodities with broader geographic scope following US entry into World War II. The act remained active through 1948 before being re-enacted in 1949. Extensions occurred successfully in 1944, 1945, 1946, and 1947 despite initial temporary intentions.

  246

• 3. Postwar Cold War Extensions

  ›

  After World War II ended, the Export Control Act expanded to prevent advanced technology from reaching the Soviet bloc and China. National security concerns grew significantly after the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950. These new factors provided compelling reasons for passing the Export Control Act of 1949. The law included domestic policies aimed primarily at conditions within the United States alongside foreign policy controls. Scarcity of certain goods in world markets made continued controls necessary to prevent inflationary effects. The technology did not have to be military-specific as demonstrated by a 1982 incident involving Bell Labs. Bell Labs chess-playing computer Belle was impounded before it could travel to Moscow for an exhibition. Legislation directed the president to enlist cooperation from other nations regarding trade controls on the Soviet bloc. Benefits of economic and military aid programs were withheld from non-cooperating nations under the Mutual Defense Assistance Control Act of 1951. This act became known as the Battle Act and required parallel controls with US standards. Extensions continued through 1951, 1953, 1956, and again in 1958.

  1113

• 4. Domestic Economic Impacts

  ›

  The scarcity of certain goods in world markets created pressure to maintain export controls beyond wartime needs. Preventing a drain on plentiful American supplies helped avoid consequential inflationary effects domestically. National security concerns emerged as new and compelling reasons for extending the Export Control Act of 1949 after the Korean War began. Controls served both economic and security standpoints simultaneously according to the legislation text. Short supply and consequent inflationary effect on foreign demand drove domestic policy decisions. Autarchy and self-sufficiency in strategic resources not available in sufficiently large quantities also mattered greatly. The law included domestic policies aimed primarily at conditions within the United States alongside foreign policy instruments. These measures prevented resource drain while maintaining economic stability during periods of global tension. The act remained active through multiple extensions despite initial expectations that controls would soon disappear upon re-enactment in 1949.

  810

• 5. Extraterritorial Enforcement

  ›

  The Export Control Act of 1949 rendered all persons wherever situated subject to its regulations under US law. Exports of scarce materials were controlled from an economic standpoint regarding short supply and inflationary effects. Security considerations focused on autarchy and self-sufficiency in strategic resources unavailable in sufficient quantities globally. That is exemplified by restrictions on exporting strategic or military items to the Soviet bloc. The foreign policy motive became so strong it brought legislation directing presidential cooperation with other nations. This required parallel controls on trade with the Soviet bloc matching those of the United States. Benefits of various economic and military aid programs were withheld from non-cooperating nations under the Battle Act. The Mutual Defense Assistance Control Act of 1951 established these international enforcement mechanisms clearly. Legislation directed the president to enlist cooperation from other nations enacting controls on trade with the Soviet bloc. International cooperation mechanisms like the Battle Act ensured broader adherence to US export restrictions beyond American borders.

  12