A comprehensive debate on the ethics of doing business in countries under totalitarian rule is dependent on investigating the ethics of a particular corporation. In which direction do the core values of the corporation manifest themselves? The deliberation requires an examination of the extent of the business (i.e. foreign sales, foreign factories and production) and the effects of each on the corporation, its employees, the regime and the greater international marketplace. The inquiry assumes that both the home government of the multinational corporation and the autocratic state in which the corporation will conduct business approve of the corporation's actions. Without that approval, no business can proceed. Further, the question of the safety of the corporation and its workers must be examined; is a corporation operating in a peaceful dictatorship or a nation on the throes of revolt? Without answers to these questions, no real understanding of the ethical implications can be found.
What is the purpose of a business in the world? A corporation is a money-generating entity; its primary function is to maximize owner profits. Whatever the corporation is offering, it can only stay alive by remaining profitable. In this construct, it is ethical for a corporation to do business in any country as long as it produces revenues greater than its expenses. But the question goes deeper. How a corporation integrates values into its mission statement vis-vis the environment, worker relations and empowerment, and governmental cooperation affect how it goes about conducting its business. Much like an organic farmer chooses to eschew the use of harmful pesticides and chemicals on his crops, a corporation must weigh the profitability of conducting business in a particular region against its moral qualms with the governments with which they must cooperate to conduct this business. What does the corporation value beyond profits and uphold as equally important or more important than revenue? If a corporation adheres to a moral code valuing benevolent means toward profit (i.e. fair-trade practices, fair treatment of employees, worker empowerment), it is unlikely to consider such business. But, if the venture would inevitably be profitable, it could be argued by definition that it would be unethical for the corporation not to operate in a dictatorship.
Thus it must remain that a basically amoral corporation would be acting against its core values if it did not seek new avenues for income. Only when a business integrates other moral concerns such as abhorrence of totalitarian regimes does it become unethical to do business in dictatorships.