PEPSI BURMA CASE: A CASE OF VIOLATION OF ETHICS

The situation in Myanmar in the first half of the 90s is an ideal case of human rights violation. The extremist iron handed approach of the SLORC dictators was creating an extreme economic and humanitarian crisis. State Law and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) were a group of military officers that brutally repressed dissent and killed thousands of civilians. SLORC invited foreign private investors and companies in Burma with the hope of improving the economy. The influx of foreign companies due to the opening economy did bring the much required foreign exchange but at what cost? Many companies including PepsiCo further exploited the already rotting situation in Burma. The tax paid by PepsiCo and other companies was at the disposal of the STORC dictators who used them to further strengthen their situation.

MORAL OBLIGATIONS?(Y/N)
It was a very shrewd act by the PepsiCo management. It looks as if it agreed to bend to the mass protest and discontent but in reality if we dig deeper we see that in its

announcement Pepsi covered more facts than it revealed. It was still to continue selling its concentrate and the bottling plant would continue to make Pepsi beverages in Burma. The tax money would still go to the STORC. Depletion and exploitation would still continue .So more than the moral obligation it home pressure that forced PepsiCo to divest itself of all its Burmese assets.

ETHICS
Utilatarion view This view encourages efficiency and productivity and is

Consistent with the goal of profit maximization. PepsiCo was only interested in making their cash reserves look better Just because business is synonymous with profits doesnt mean the very notion of concern and appreciation of sensitive world issues should be absent. PepsiCo was so blinded by its profit making motivation that it didnt give a second thought to how it was adding to the agony of the Burmese people who were already facing unimaginable drudgery. Due to no value of Burmese money in the
international market PepsiCo engaged in counter trade resulting in rapid depletion of Burmas natural resources and food stock.

Rights View: It had absolutely no concern regarding its standing on the grounds
of human rights and business morale. PepsiCo all the time had a moral obligation to divest itself of its Burmese assets which is seconded by the student protests in top Ivy League college, US state municipalities, shareholders etc. So the wrongdoing of PepsiCo
can be best categorised as a violation of ethics concerning human rights.

Justice View :
Fair and Impartial: The STORC govt didnt provide much room for the transparency and impartiality. Equal pay: No question! Here Forced Labor was rampant. All decisions based on Favoritism of the dictators.

Hence as per the above arguments, we can say that Strategies and Actions of Pepsico in Burma was solely governed by Utilitarian Ethics.