Unocal Case Analysis

Unocal Case Analysis

This case discusses the ethical issue of Union Oil Company of California (Unocal), which was responsible for constructing the 256-mile pipeline to carry the gas from Yadana to Thailand in the Burma’s gas project. However, there were egregious human rights violations occurring in southern Burma during the pipeline construction period. The argument is whether Unocal benefited the people of Burma to develop their living environment, or ruined the normal human rights from the Burmese.

In the side of Utilitarian approach, the Unocal really did a good job. Although, hundreds of Karen were used as forced labor and also forced to relocate to accommodate the pipeline project, it provided more jobs for local people and made a huge improvement for Asian countries’ economic growth. Considering the above mentioned benefits and cost, Unocal get the positive consequence in the utilitarian approach. My recommendation is Unocal could provide some compensation to the forced labor so that people would have more social benefit from the project.

In the side of rights approach, the Unocal did not take the right action when they decide to invest in the pipeline project. Due to the business contract between Unocal and Burma’s government, the rights of human beings were violated. When the Burmese military provided security for the project, they not only secure the construction area, but also forced people out of their home without any compensation and enslaved many Karen people into labor without any payment. These immoral actions totally violated the human rights, my recommendation is Unocal should make a contract with the Burmese government that provide more economic support for securing the contraction area without violating any human right.

In the side of justice approach, Unocal is unjust because there were unfair in the distributions of the revenue and injuries. The