Week 5: Sex Trafficking

This week, Week 5, marks the second-to-last week of the second part of our course, which as you know from the syllabus is entitled “What Counts as Sex Work.” In this section, we’ve been reading and talking about the various forms that sex work takes, the working conditions of sex workers at various levels of the trade, and the enormity and ubiquity of the global sex industry. So, as always, please be sure to keep in mind as you’re preparing for class on Wednesday that Jeffreys seems to be right: The global economy as it currently exists (i.e., neoliberal capitalism via the processes of globalization) cannot exist without the global sex industry, and vice versa. They each depend on the other for their survival.

Also keep in mind the equation that I wrote on the board during the first week of class:

SEX TRAFFICKING does not (necessarily) = SEX WORK

In other words, while those who are trafficked (whatever that means?) for work in the global sex industry do often (but not always) end up in prostitution (but not necessarily street level), those who are SEX WORKERS of whatever sort are not necessarily the “victims” of trafficking.

This is a key point to understanding the material reality that, yes, the (sometimes) forced migration of human beings is one of the largest money-making ventures in the world, third only to drug and weapons trafficking. However, the above equation is also key to unpacking some of the panicked rhetoric around trafficking, which when discussed by/in the popular media – and even (as you’ll see in your reading of US and Canadian government documents this week) by state and international governing bodies – tends to focus solely on SEX TRAFFICKING to the exclusion of other, more frequent forms of HUMAN TRAFFICKING for agricultural, domestic, or industrial labour.

We’ll talk more about this latter point after the break when we return to a discussion of trafficking by reading Doezema. But for the time being, I want us to focus on the material reality of the existence of SEX TRAFFICKING and what feminists are trying to do to solve the problem(s), one of which is that there’s simply no way to tell for sure how widespread the problem really is. The reasons for this are something that we’ll talk about on Wednesday.

U.S. TVPA and the annual TIP

One thing you’ll learn from reading my article is that the 2000 U.S. Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA), which follows the abolitionist UN Palermo Protocol, has become the global model for anti-trafficking legislation, and governments around the world (including Canada) have passed similar federal legislation. The three main goals of the legislation are nick-named “the three Ps”: prosecution, protection, and prevention. The problem, though, as Jeffreys and I point out, is that the U.S.’s objective in passing the original legislation was to protect U.S. sovereignty and keep out illegal immigrants engaged in transnational organized crime networks (which, as you you’ll read this week, have become identified as the primary perpetrators of all kinds of trafficking, human or otherwise).

As a result, the TVPA is not, at its foundation, about helping to end sexualized violence against women; in fact, since its implementation in 2000, the TVPA has enabled increased funds to law enforcement while actually cutting funding to feminist community-based organizations in the U.S. such as domestic violence emergency shelters and related services to which “victims” of trafficking might turn to seek help. Thus, the focus is clearly on the first P – prosecution – rather than on the other two, protection and prevention. Lots of U.S. feminists have critiqued the TVPA for this major flaw, but it continues to be used as the model for anti-trafficking legislation globally. Obviously, this is hugely problematic if you’re a feminist and your goal is to draw attention to and hopefully solve the problem of SEX TRAFFICKING, which usually (but not always) involves the exploitation of women’s bodies.

The TVPA established the U.S. State Department’s Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons and mandated that new office to, among other things, research and publish a Trafficking in Persons Report (TIP) each year. In this report, which has been published annually since 2001 and is considered one of the best global resources on global anti-trafficking efforts, the U.S. ranks countries in tiers according to how well (or not) each country is enforcing the TVPA on its own soil. Tier 1 represents “countries whose governments fully comply with the Trafficking Victims Protection Act’s (TVPA) minimum standards,” and that’s where Canada is. Tier 2 is a list of countries whose “governments do not fully comply with the TVPA’s minimum standards, but are making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards.” The Tier 2 Watch List represents those countries that have been placed on Tier 2, but there seems to be an alarming increase in trafficking “victims,” there’s been a failure to provide specific evidence of anti-trafficking efforts, and/or the country knows things aren’t going well, but has made promises to improve over the course of the next year. This is where Russia is. Tier 3 is a list of countries that “do not fully comply with the minimum standards and are not making significant efforts to do so” (2011 TIP Report, http://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/2011/ 164228.htm).

An interesting component to all this is that the TVPA is a U.S. law, yet the U.S. finds no conflict or problem in its insistence that other countries adhere to it, which is why so many countries have adopted similar legislation. They’re trying to get/stay on Tier 1 because once a country gets placed on Tier 3, they lose all U.S. aid monies. And this is, in part, how/why the abolitionist anti-trafficking framework came to dominate international politics. It’s also why the U.S. instituted the Tier 2 Watch List, because there are lots of countries on the 2WL that probably should be on Tier 3, but the U.S. needs them as allies for political purposes. Think Russia, for example. It’s a fascinating process having to do, again, with the primary goal of protecting U.S. sovereignty and preventing illegal immigration.

Another interesting little factoid is that up until 2010, the U.S. didn’t include itself in the annual TIP Report! It does now, and places itself, rather predictably, on Tier 1. Fun stuff, no?

Canada’s anti-trafficking law closely resembles the U.S. TVPA in its focus on the three Ps of prosecution, protection, and prevention. But, as you’ll see from the Department of Justice webpage, it adds a fourth P to the mix: promoting partnerships. This is a laudable and necessary goal, one the U.S. actually did incorporate into the TVPA when the legislation was renewed a few years ago. Unfortunately, as you’ll read in the RCMP report, this fourth P, like the others, is easier said than done, so be sure for Wednesday to figure out what challenges Canada faces in the enforcement of its anti-trafficking law.

Also, as you’re reading for Wednesday, be sure to pay attention to how important language continues to be in talking about and trying to solve the problem of trafficking. Even the notion of “trafficking” is, itself, potentially problematic. So, taking the lead I set in my article, do a feminist analysis of the RCMP document: Who are the “victims?” Who are the “villains?” Who are the “johns?” Why? What can you tell from the language used by the Canadian Department of Justice and the RCMP about the positionalities (review Agustin on this), theoretical frameworks, and ideologies that might be at the foundation of Canadian attempts to end human trafficking?

And lastly, compare the U.S. State Department’s assessment of how Canada’s doing with the RCMP’s own self-assessment. Are there agreements? Disagreements?

A Reminder

Don’t forget to keep track of your CRPs, which are due at the start of class on Mondays. Details about the assignment can be found here. Be sure to include all the required components as described and also remember to bring a copy to submit to me as well as a copy for yourself so that you can refer to it during class.

I’ll see you all in class! In the meantime, happy reading, and please don’t hesitate to stop by during my office hours or e-mail me at kawilliams(at)mtroyal.ca if you have any questions.