After a dozen years of human-rights protests over the U.S. trade policy to China, Beijing’s most-favored-nation status remained untouched. But when recent efforts failed to stop China from pirating American computer programs, the Clinton administration last week proposed the largest trade sanction in U.S. history.

Cynicism is an understandable response to the administration’s decision, but the intentions behind the sanctions eventually could also improve human-rights conditions in China. The important thing for the administration is to continue to negotiate with the Chinese while remaining serious about the June deadline for the $3 billion in sanctions.

The Clinton administration was forced to act after China broke an agreement signed last year and allowed its factories to produce knockoffs of American products such as computer software, records and other intellectual property. China, not surprisingly, immediately retaliated by erecting trade barriers against U.S. automobiles, telecommunications equipment and other goods. The U.S. sanctions would add a 100-percent tariff to affected Chinese goods, including clothing, electronics and sports equipment.

For the last three presidential administrations, the United States has tried to use its trade policies to persuade China to improve human-rights conditions. But wary of offending Beijing, the United States would not seriously consider revoking China’s most-favored-nation status. The result during the 1980s and ’90s was that the U.S. pleadings could be ignored and were. The failure of Beijing to honor intellectual property rights was an example of this. Even on last week’s threatened sanctions, there was a feeling that they could be whittled away during the next month as U.S. companies with interests in China lean on the White House.

The Clinton administration must be committed to using the sanctions to demonstrate that the United States is sincere in its protests over violations of trade laws. By proving itself on this smaller issue now, the United States could carry more influence when human-rights questions arise in the future.

A trade war is not the inevitable consequence of sanctions. Both countries need each other too much for that. But unless China believes that the United States is willing to accept some economic loss now, it has no reason to comply with the restrictions of trade agreements in the future. These sanctions could change that view.