Abstract This paper examines the ethical considerations in the Unocal/Burma Engagement. Unocal accepted a contract with Burma’s dictatorship government and its state-owned company (MOGE)to build a pipe line for natural gas through Southern Burma into Thailand. Minorities, especially the Keran people, were egregiously treated by Burma’s government as MOGE supported and prepared the path for Unocal’s pipleline through the area of the Keran people. Unocal was aware of the treatment but did nothing. They felt the benefits both economically, and socially, that the project would bring would outweigh much of the violation of rights suffered. Apparently it did – somewhat. Ethical Considerations in Unocal's "Burma Engagement" Case Summary: The...The end:
.....Burmese rebels to improve their bargaining power with their government. Lastly, it could proceed as it did, considering doing so as its best ethical solution. Select Best solution: The best solution is pretty much what Unocal did. It tried to institute work and benefit programs for people near pipe line. It also relied on the benefits of the project to ultimately provide improved economics and future rights possibilities for the Burmese people as it helps enrich the nation. That's an ethical result. References Zandullet, L. & Fraser, D. (2004). Corporate engagement project, field visit report, third visit, Yadana Gas Transportation Project. Cambridge, MA: Collaborative for Development Action. Doe v. Unocal, 248 F.3d 915 (9th Cir. 2001).