The tension between the demands of international law and perceptions of basic national interests, both domestic and foreign, is seldom more profound than when the United States Government contemplates the use of force abroad. In the economic and financial sphere, a delicate tension likewise marks the introduction and implementation of unilateral foreign policy sanctions. Over the decades, the U.S. has chosen in some instances to introduce what I will call "feel-good" unilateral sanctions, that is, those intended to meet some pressing national security concern but that do little damage to the target nation-State because of alternative sources of supply. In such cases, United States exporters are known to have concluded that all the Government has achieved is to "shoot itself (and United States business enterprises) in the foot." In late 1981, however, there came a time when a President of the United States decided that unilateral sanctions were going to have a real bite, and it was on that occasion that the paths of Don Wallace and Davis Robinson first intersected, much to the ultimate fondness of the latter.
II. Siberian Pipeline Sanctions of 1981-1982
During 1981 and 1982, Don Wallace, in addition to his responsibilities as a distinguished international law professor at Georgetown University Law Center, was of counsel to a law firm that was ultimately retained by John Brown & Company, the single largest employer in Glasgow, Scotland, to oppose and contest sanctions that, if enforced, would have a calamitous effect on the business operations of the parent and of its subsidiary, John Brown Engineering. All of John Brown's revenues were