Unfortunately, much of the proposed legislation supported by trade opponents would impose a variety of economic sanctions that could conceivably lead to wholesale trade wars and embargoes. The failure of unilateral economic sanctions. In addition to hurting the interests of American consumers and producers, this would do little to end religious persecution. For example, freedom of religious expression in Cuba does not seem to have received a big boost because of our embargo. While there might be other reasons out there for continuation, it stretches plausibility to say that the embargo is helping the cause of religious minorities there.
Proponents cite the case of South Africa as an example of workable sanctions.
But, let's recall the South Africa case was one that was pushed by a global, moral consensus. It was this consensus, more than anything else, which was responsible for the end of apartheid. In fact, the most liberal institutions in South Africa were market institutions that resisted the apartheid hiring restrictions. For the most part, however, the countries targeted by current sanctions proposals being discussed are not highly developed countries, they are not very capitalistic, they are not exporting raw materials, and there is no world consensus on behalf of their economic strangulation. Far better to cut off economic aid, encourage trade to thrive and use moral pressure to change their internal policies.