Conducting people in volatile countries is very risky in two dimensions. The company risks losing its employees through atrocities and war since some people may lose their lives (Frederic, 2007). It also risks losing its investments in case the war splits to destruction of property and life. I therefore would advice that the company halts the businesses in such volatile countries until calm is restored. Even though the products and service are insured, the employees’ life may be at risk. According to financial revenue generated from these locations. It would have been prudent to continue with the business as usual. But since the war is between the governments against its own people, one may not be able to predict the kind of destruction that the business of the common men would suffer and even the physical harm it is may cause.
If the international bodies chooses to issue sanctions against the government of these countries. It is very likely that the revenues will be drastically affected and hence the company will run at a loss. The performance of a company greatly depends on the working conditions of its labor. When the working conditions pose a threat to life of the workers, then it would be very vital that the businesses be halted.
Crime against humanity is the worst from of crime a government may be accused of (Singer, 2010). Political tensions affect the economic power of a nation which in turn drastically affects investments. Therefore, when faced with issues of political instability, any company looking forward to start investment should consider the long term effects of violence and how it is likely to affect the rates of return on investment. With immense riots and strikes, the business is likely to suffer. Therefore halting operations until this settle down would be a viable option for the business at the moment.