The global problem of trade in human beings, primarily but not exclusively women and girls, has drawn increasing international concern in the past several years. President Clinton has termed the practice " a fundamental human rights violation." The United Nations estimates that 4 million people become victims of trafficking each year across international borders, with the highest rates found in South and Southeast Asia. In addition, trafficking can occur within a single country, such as from northern Thailand to Bangkok. As many as half of the total are children under 18. The smugglers and officials who control the trade make around $7 billion in annual profits-more, according to the U.S. State Department, than the illegal weapons market.

Traffic in human beings is not as simple as the buying and selling of products. It is closely connected to a web of social and economic problems including endemic poverty, migration, corruption and organized crime. The low status of women in many Asian countries adds to the problem. There are both "push" and "pull" factors: for example, violations of human rights by Burma's military regime led many women to flee and subsequently become victims of trafficking. As many as 1.5 million Asian women are currently working abroad, legally or illegally. Parallel to legal immigration and overseas work agencies in many countries are well-organized trafficking syndicates who take advantage of women seeking to stay afloat in the global economy.

A significant portion of human trafficking involves commercial sex work, whether voluntary or coerced. An estimated 225,000 women from Southeast Asia are sold into prostitution each year, with an additional 150,000 from South Asia. Many of these women, as well as both boy and girl children end up in the lucrative and repulsive sex tourism market.

Prostitution and trafficking, however, are not identical issues. A broader definition of trafficking in persons includes anyone sold or forced to perform labor in conditions of servitude. The Global Alliance Against Trafficking in Women, a Thailand-based regional organization, summarizes trafficking as "all acts involved in the recruitment or transportation of [people], within or across national borders, for work or services, by means of violence or threat of violence, debt bondage, deception, or other coercion."

As Undersecretary of State Frank Loy testified to the Senate in February 2000: "It is impossible to overstate the horror of trafficking. In some villages in Southeast Asia, there are few young women and girls left. Where have they gone? The answer is that agents descend upon villages and harvest these children like a profitable crop to take to market-sometimes abducting them, and often luring and enticing them with tragically false promises, sometimes simply buying them from desperate parents…" The cultural circumstances vary, but the fear and violence are universal.

Poorer countries, such as Bangladesh, Nepal, Cambodia and Vietnam, tend to be the primary sources of trafficking victims. Larger or slightly more developed societies, including India, Pakistan, and China, are key destinations and transit points. The newly industrialized regions of Taiwan, Malaysia and Hong Kong are also magnets for traffickers, both for sex and other forms of forced/indentured labor. The trade extends beyond South and Southeast Asia as well, as victims are sent to Japan, the Middle East, and Europe. Japan is the largest market for East Asian sex trafficking, involving at least 150,000 women from primarily the Philippines and Thailand. Over 200, 000 Bangladeshi, Nepali and Pakistani women are believed to have been trafficked to the Gulf States and Arabian peninsula.

As many as 50,000 trafficked women and children come to the U.S. from Southeast Asia and the former Soviet Union, many willingly but unaware of the poor living conditions they will face as sweatshop workers or domestic servants. A recent Central Intelligence Agency report recounts the stories of women who came to the U.S. in response to ads for au pair, sales clerk, secretarial or waitress jobs, only to find themselves taken prisoner and forced into prostitution or indentured servitude ("International Trafficking in Women to the United States: A Contemporary Manifestation of Slavery"). Among six countries listed as major export sources for traffic into the U.S. are Thailand and Vietnam.

U.S. law currently gives comparatively light sentences (maximum of ten years in prison) for trafficking convictions. Disputes over jurisdiction and difficulties in evidence gathering mean that many cases never come to trial. Victims of trafficking, particularly in the sex trade, are generally deported back to their home countries, where the conditions that propelled them into the hands of traffickers have to change and where little or no legal redress is available.

Congressional Action

As trafficking has been growing both in severity and international attention, lawmakers around the world have realized that existing legal systems are inadequate to the task of preventing trafficking, prosecuting perpetrators and assisting victims. The U.S. Congress, with the support of the Clinton administration and the President's Interagency Council on Women, has elevated this issue to receive legislative priority.

Despite widespread recognition of the problem, however, Congress' response has so far not been well coordinated. Six different bills were introduced in the 1999 session, some dealing with only a part of the problem, misconstruing the issue or offering inappropriate solutions. Portions of several of these bills were cobbled together to form the "Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 1999," introduced by Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) with bipartisan co-sponsorship. This bill, H.R. 3244, passed the House of Representatives by voice vote on May 9, 2000. It has been referred to the Senate for consideration.

The Senate also is considering two versions of a similar bill: S. 2414, backed by Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.), and S.2449, from Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan). Wellstone and Brownback are expected to iron out their differences soon and present a single bill. Some
Of the bills' provisions are related to the legal protections in the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), portions of which were struck down in a recent Supreme Court ruling. This is not expected to affect the trafficking law; in fact, the Senate may attach a re-authorization of VAWA to its compromise version.

The trafficking bills are in general agreement on policy direction the U.S. should take; they differ largely on the punitive measures for countries that fail to comply (see "Sanctions," below). All the mentioned bills would, among other provisions, establish an Interagency Task Force on Trafficking, set minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking, and establish programs overseas under the aegis of the State Department's Crime Victims Fund. Penalties for trafficking crimes, in all versions of the bills, would be doubled to a maximum sentence of 20 years. Certain victims would become eligible for resettlement in the U.S. under a proposed new "T" visa, capped at 5,000 per year. However, the House bill restricts this protection to victims " who face a well-founded fear of retribution if they return," a definition which already exists for refugee and asylum cases. In a further restriction, the house Judiciary Committee passed an amendment limiting visas to children under 16. Few, if any, victims would meet both criteria. Since the threat of deportation is one of the main factors that keeps victims in bondage, stronger immigration protection is essential.

Critics of the Smith bill and its Senate counterparts maintain that the new task force and reporting requirements would add little to the existing information on the issue published in the annual State Department Human Rights Reports. More importantly, all three bills offer too little money to address the problem at its source. The total proposed authorization is $31.5 million in fiscal year 2001 and $63 million in 2002, only a third of which would assist victims in other countries. Letters sent to Congress from the International Human Rights Law Group and United Church of Christ (UCC) both recommend doubling these allocations, at least in the first year.

The Debatable Issue of Imposing Sanctions

Central to the trafficking bills currently under consideration in Congress is imposition of sanctions for countries that fail to comply with the agreed-upon minimum standards. Beginning in 2003, non-humanitarian foreign assistance would be suspended, and U.S. representatives would be instructed to block any loans or multilateral assistance to the country. In the Brownback bill (S.2449), these sanctions are mandatory, while the House and Wellstone versions make them discretionary and more carefully targeted.

While targeted sanctions are seen as preferable to broad, non-selective punishments, many churches and human rights groups have spoken out against the use of sanctions at all as a means to reduce the incidence of trafficking. The State Department is also opposed, arguing that since no government supports trafficking, sanctions are an inappropriate tool. Mainline church groups object, in the words of the UCC Office for Church in Society, that "cutting off foreign aid and developmental assistance would only drive more people into poverty and trafficking…Offering $15 or $30 million to other countries, then threatening them with $10 billion worth of economic sanctions, is all stick and little carrot."

One of the remarkable aspects of the anti-trafficking coalition has been its interdenominational character. Church partners in Asia have led in calling attention to the problem. ECPAT-USA (End Child Prostitution and Trafficking), an ecumenical coalition, has researched and documented trafficking. A joint working group, including both mainline Protestants, Catholics and evangelicals, has reached broad consensus on addressing the three components of protection, prosecution and prevention.

For example, the House measure was backed by a broad range of groups, from the Family Research Council to the progressive feminist organization Equality Now. Representatives who normally fight tooth and nail on religious freedom, foreign aid and abortion language united to pass the trafficking initiative.

This coalition threatens to break down over the issue of sanctions. More conservative groups tend to criticize all foreign aid in general, rather than seeing it as a solution to the problem of poverty. But, as with sanctions for violations of religious freedom, a strong-arm approach on the part of the U.S. government could even make the problem more serious. Precisely because trade in human beings is so universally despised and condemned a stance of cooperation instead of sanctions makes clear sense.

Written by the Asia Pacific Center for Justice and Peace with staff of the Presbyterian Washington Office.

Suggested Actions:

As the House already passed its version of the bill, the focus for advocacy now shifts to the Senate. Contact your Senators and urge them to support a strong trafficking bill that includes the following elements:

Doubled funding for victim protection and reintegration programs, particularly those in South and Southeast Asia;

Genuine immigration protection for victims of trafficking, regardless of age or status;

Prosecution of traffickers without victimizing those trafficked;

No conditions or proof that victims of trafficking need to meet in order to become eligible for services;

No use of sanctions as a stick to curb trafficking;

Provision of incentives to countries that cooperate in addressing the issue.

A sample letter follows; please personalize as much as possible.

Addresses

The Honorable ___________
U.S. Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121

Dear Senator___________

I am pleased that Congress has made the global issue of trafficking in persons a priority in legislative work this session. As one of the fastest growing examples of international criminal activity, trafficking constitutes a fundamental violation of human rights. Although the problem is most serious in South and Southeast Asia, an increasing number of trafficked women and children are arriving in the United States as well. The House has taken leadership in passing H.R. 3244, the Trafficking Victim's Protection Act. The Senate should pass an even stronger version that increases penalties for perpetrators while protecting victims, particularly through immigration privileges. Rather than use inappropriate sanctions, Congress should spend more money towards education and cooperation with other countries that are equally concerned about the issue.

I urge you to pass a comprehensive trafficking bill that includes these elements and doubles funding for programs that help victims in the U.S. and in Asia. If you have not already signed on to the Senate version of the Trafficking Act, please do so at the soonest possible opportunity.

General Assembly Guidance

The 209th General Assembly in a resolution "Women, Children, and International Prostitution" supported a range of actions to address the problems of international trafficking human beings. It urged the church to "identify and act on problems of sexual exploitation that exist in their own community, as well as in other countries."