Human Trafficking in Europe and the Middle East
Porsche Investigates Forced Labor Under Hitler
Published October 13, 2009 @ 01:00PM PT
With the galactically-high price tag that comes with a Porsche, you'd think each of the people involved in making one are being paid pretty handsomely. That might be the case today, but it wasn't always so. Porsche has admitted to using forced labor in their factories during Hitler's regime in Germany before and during WWII, and are now investigating the extent of the abuses.
Porsche has owned up to enslaving at least 50 workers during that period, but journalist and researcher Ulrich Viehoefer claims that up to 300 might have been enslaved during that period, and possibly more. 300 people might not seem like a huge number, but it represents over half of the workforce of Porsche at the time. Porsche has thus far paid 2.5 million euros in reparations to victims of forced labor in their factories, but the discovery of an additional 300 could increase that amount.
Why is it important that Porsche is investigating allegations of forced slavery over 60 years ago? For one, it sets a great precedent for companies that abused or enslaved workers in Nazi Germany and under other regimes with a general disdain for human rights to face up to their history. The reparations especially could help pave the way for other companies to repay the individuals and families of those they have wrong. The investigation also practically puts a halo on Porsche's head -- so few corporations are willing to examine, much less address, serious human rights abuses in their past. The investigation has the potential not just to help Porsche's former victims, but cement better labor practices for Porsche and it's competitors.
So props to Porsche for taking on a hard but important task. Hopefully their initiative and focus on justice will help encourage other companies -- you know who you are -- to address historical human rights abuses. After all, if you can't face the problems in your past, how can you face the problems in your present?
Photo credit: stephenhanafin
French Culture Minister "Excited" By Sex with Slave Boys
Published October 09, 2009 @ 05:30AM PT
Move over Roman Polanski -- you no longer have a monopoly on sick, ethically-vacant European men who shamelessly enjoy sex with unwilling children. France's Culture Minister Frederic Mitterrand is now getting heat for a book he wrote four years ago in which he not only pays for sex with young boys in Thailand, but gets a little happy in the trousers thinking about "the slave market" that made those boys available. Will someone please tell me how this man is still employed running France?
Here are some quotes from his aptly titled 2005 book The Bad Life,
"I got into the habit of paying for boys, [despite knowing] the sordid details of this traffic. ... All these rituals of the market for youths, the slave market excited me enormously... the abundance of very attractive and immediately available young boys put me in a state of desire."
The list of things that outrage me about this statement unfortunately exceeds the 500 word limit I try and impose on myself for these posts. But perhaps my most immediate question is why has it taken four years for someone to realize that this high-powered politician knowingly had sex with trafficked children? He is so brazen in his announcement of lust at the idea of a slave market. And it's not like this was information was discovered through some blackmail pictures or old emails unearthed by an assistant. It was in a freakin' published book! And I thought the French were a nation of readers ...
Mitterand, of course, claims he's done nothing wrong. He clarifies,
"It is neither a novel nor my memoirs. I preferred to leave things vague. Nothing is true, nothing is false."
Wow, thanks for clearing things up. Now I have a perfect idea and absolutely no idea of what happened. He's also complained that everyone is unfairly confusing pedophilia with homosexuality. Just to make sure we're not doing that, let's read his quote again, this time with the gender changed to be female.
"I got into the habit of paying for girls, [despite knowing] the sordid details of this traffic. All these rituals of the market for youths, the slave market excited me enormously... the abundance of very attractive and immediately available young girls put me in a state of desire."
Well, that statement still pisses me off. You?
It's not the gender of the children in the slave market you wrote about raping that's an issue, Mitterrand, -- it's raping children in the slave market! And even if every one of those boys had just had his 18th birthday, you admit yourself that the details of how they got into your bed were "sordid," and you even use the word "traffic." Having sex with adult trafficking victims is wrong, too. And the fact that you state it's the buying and selling (the market) of young boys that makes you hot in the biscuit is disturbing to say the least.
I know that the French people realize their culture is pretty awesome, and I hope that they realize it deserves better than to be tainted by a scummy politician who gets his jollies from sex trafficking. Get this guy out of office and let him and Polanski live on some farm somewhere with nothing but each other for company. They certainly deserve each other.
Photo credit: letemps.ch
London Considers Axing Human Trafficking Police Unit
Published October 08, 2009 @ 01:00PM PT
Here's something to file under Really Bad Ideas Someone's Gonna Lose a Job Over: London, the most populous city in the European Union (with over 250,000 immigrants each year), is considering shutting down the Human Trafficking Unit of the Metropolitan Police due to budget issues. London is a huge destination and transit city for human trafficking victims from all over the world, and shutting down the police force trained to identify and remove victims would be nothing short of catastrophic for the many slaves being held there today.
British and international advocacy groups have expressed everything from concern to outrage at this suggestion. Human trafficking has now been identified as the second or third largest form of organized crime in the world, and diverting resources to any crime less significant is a tough argument to make. And trafficking may even be on this rise when the 2012 Olympics come to London. Even if trafficking doesn't increase in conjunction with the games (as many people fear it will) and remains stagnant, law enforcement will be severely understaffed and unable to properly address it. Furthermore, many advocates fear that without a dedicated unit, the only form of trafficking law enforcement will pay attention to is trafficking into commercial sex industries, leaving no help for slaves in domestic servitude, factories, agriculture, and other industries.
The Met's answer to these concerns is that human trafficking cases will be spread out to other officers. I've got news for you, London. I've trained a lot of cops in my time, and none of them were born understanding human trafficking. I can't tell you how many good, hardworking police officers have missed human trafficking victims standing right in front of them because they didn't know what to look for. This is a hidden crime and the victims are chameleons -- they often look like victims of other crimes or even criminals. How can you expect someone to tease out the intricacies of human trafficking and tell the victims from the perpetrators without any training or support from colleagues who are also experts on the issue?
To me, this move says that London is not nearly as concerned with ending slavery in their city as they are with balancing their budget. The Met Human Trafficking Unit has been lauded as an international example of a highly efficient and effective law enforcement effort. They have brought hundreds of cases against traffickers and freed even more victims. Why would you shut them down? I know money is tight right now, London, but of all the cities in the world to consider this move, you are one of the most dangerous. I hope we never find out how serious this mistake could have been.
Photo credit: JD Mack
Are U.S. Government Contractors Still Supporting Slavery?
Published October 07, 2009 @ 01:00PM PT
A few months ago, The Slave Next Door exposed the truth that, as late as 2005, U.S. government contractors were using slave labor in construction projects paid for by American taxpayers. Employees at the notorious firm DynCorp were accused of having sex with girls as young as 12 in Bosnia in the late 1990s. Now, American taxpayers may be supporting more trafficking through government contractor ArmorGroup. They are accused of frequenting brothels in Afghanistan known to enslave young girls, an act which is in direct violation of U.S. law and Department of State policy. But do you really need a law to tell you sex with underage enslaved girls is wrong?
Former ArmorGroup Director of Operations-turned-whistle-blower James Gordon filed a suit this past month. alleging that not only did ArmorGroup employees break the law by visiting brothels known for holding trafficked women and girls, they withheld documents and blocked efforts to investigate or end the illegal outings. And this little scandal went all the way to the top -- the manager in charge in Kabul is accused as being part of these activities, even though he knew they were illegal. The Trafficking Victims Protection Act prohibits government contractors or employees from visiting brothels overseas.
Gordon says he was concerned because the brothel ArmorGroup employees frequented was known to sell very young Chinese girls and women against their will, and because he was worried that all that sex was distracting the employees from their job -- guarding the U.S. embassy in Kabul. Seriously, Gordon? I mean, why would a U.S. embassy in Kabul need focused and steady protection? Tell me one bad thing that has ever happened to a U.S. embassy overseas in a war-torn area full of insurgents. Oh, wait..... Maybe ArmorGroup should have been doing what I (and the other taxpayers) are paying them to do and not raping young Chinese girls. And yes, their "outings" got in the way of work, because some of them happened during business hours -- hours they should have been protecting the U.S. embassy.
But just visiting the brothels wasn't enough for some of the ArmorGroup employees. Gordon claims to have overhead one AG recruit arranging to buy a girl for $20,000, but was skeptical that he could start making money off her right away. This particular recruit was eventually fired, but the company made very little effort to investigate the incident or do anything to prevent employees from trying to buy and traffic other women and girls. At the rate these guys were being unethical, I'm frankly surprised they didn't congratulate him for being skeptical of such a large investment.
So in addition to supporting human trafficking, ArmorGroup employees were endangering the lives of U.S. embassy staff and guests, as well as the others who worked with them by thinking a lot more with their "downstairs brains" then their bigger, upstairs brains. The lawsuit is pending, but the case has also been brought to the attention of the State Department. Hopefully, this case will be one to show U.S. government contractors that the U.S. is serious about that whole don't-support-slavery-with-U.S.-taxpayer-dollars thing. However, this isn't the first time that a government contractor has been caught exploiting women in brothels or workers in construction. And I'm worried that it won't be the last.
Photo credit: mr.nomind
UN to Russia: Prevent Exploitation, Protect Migrants
Published October 05, 2009 @ 03:00PM PT
The UN criticized Russia today for spending about as much time trying to protect migrant workers from exploitation as Donald Trump spends on his hair. And what little effort they've expended on laws and programs aiding migrants has left results about as palatable as Trump's. It's time for Russia to stop relying on abused, exploited, and enslaved migrant labor.
Millions of migrants, many of them from former Soviet bloc countries, are currently working in Russia. Most of them work in low-paying jobs like construction, factory production, agriculture, and domestic service. Migrant workers from the former Soviet Union not only provide a primary labor pool for Russia, they are vital to the economic health of their home countries. For example, money sent to Tajikistan by citizens working abroad represented 45% of its gross domestic product, an earlier U.N. study found. Most of Tajikistan's migrant workers are employed in Russia. So Russia and supplier countries both need this migration to work to continue.
Russian law, however, does not support even the most basic human rights for these workers, nor does it allow them access to social services. Because of this lack of legal protection, migrant workers in Russia are vulnerable to and suffer from exploitation, violence, and even slavery. The kicker for this whole situation is that Russia needs these workers to simply function as a country of production and industry. Their population has been steadily decreasing since the mid-1990s, and they have relied primarily on migrant labor from former Soviet bloc countries to bulk up their workforce. Perhaps this is the real reason Russia has been reluctant to engage in legal reform: fear that raising workers' wages will prevent companies from importing more workers and ultimately reduce the workforce.
But Russia should realize that creating legal protections for workers that prevent human trafficking and exploitation will eventually increase their labor force. When workers are paid fairly and given good working conditions, they will tend to stay in Russia longer to work and return to Russia (instead of another country) if they return home and need to work abroad again. It's a win-win situation for Russia and the migrant workers. But who knows how long it will take for Russia to see what needs to be done and then do it.
Photo credit: vokabre
Denmark Considers Prostitution Ban
Published September 22, 2009 @ 02:00PM PT
Denmark may be soon joining European neighbor the Netherlands in the growing club of countries who once thought laissez-faire legalized prostitution was a good idea, but are now changing their minds. The Social Democrat party has proposed instituting a full to partial ban on prostitution to prevent the country from becoming "a haven for the sex trade."
Prostitution has been legal in Denmark since 1999 and was actually legalized by the same party which is now trying to ban it. I know here in the U.S. the concept of a political party objectively evaluating the effectiveness of a policy and then changing that policy when they see a better alternative is incredibly foreign, but here is proof it can happen. The change has come after some Danish leaders noticed that they were the only country in their part of Europe with such free-for-all open prostitution allowed. Hmmm, they wondered, could this be drawing criminals, pimps, and traffickers to Denmark to take advantage of the lax laws? If the Netherlands is any sort of predictor, it sure could. Pimping and brothel ownership have never been legal in Denmark, but where there are legal commercial sex markets there are often illegal ones that follow. And like all countries with legalized prostitution, Denmark has had its share of trafficking victims.
The proposed legislation is "in line with legislation in Norway and Sweden," which I understand to mean it focuses on criminalizing the act of buying prostitution and pimping, as opposed to the act of selling sex. The goal of this style of legislation is to remove the onus of prostitution from women, where it usually falls, and place it on men, who have the social and economic power in prostitution transactions. The effectiveness of this sort of law is still a little up in the air since it's so new, but proponents claim the law reduces the exploitative parts of the commercial sex industry without throwing women in jail.
Despite increased popular support for the bill, the Danish people are not buying it just yet; only about 26% support the measure. The Social Democrat party has an uphill battle to convince the rest of Denmark that the prostitution ban could prevent their country from becoming a major destination for women in the sex trade, both forced and voluntarily, from all over the world. Of course, the pro-legalization contingent has pulled out the same arguments as usual, claiming that banning prostitution (even the Swedish model which doesn't criminalize the act for women) will drive the trade underground and into the hands of criminals. That would be a more compelling argument if such large portions of the commercial sex industry were not already controlled by criminals, even in places where prostitution is legal.
As countries like South Africa consider legalizing prostitution for the first time, we should note that the Netherlands and now Denmark who have both had legalized prostitution for over a decade are seriously rethinking their policies. There is a valuable lesson to learn from the Dutch and the Danes: a prostitution free-for-all may sound like a good idea, but it's not.
Photo credit: Ange Soleil
Government Funded Feminist Porn
Published September 14, 2009 @ 03:39PM PT
Sweden has famously taken a unique stand on how to end the exploitation of women in the commercial sex industry -- promote gender equality in prostitution. Now, they're expanding that philosophy to the porn industry by using government cash to pay for "feminist porn." But will by-women, for-women skin flicks free the porn industry from exploitation and misogyny?
The idea behind the feminist porn initiative is that porn can be wonderful and empowering for women both watching and acting in the films when it's not driven by a profit motive based in male sexual desires and couched in a culture which views women as sex objects. In other words, give the cameras to feminist filmmakers, fund the project with tax revenue, and you'll have "empowering erotica," not just male-centric porn. The project also aims to end exploitation in the industry, including ensuring everyone who takes it off on screen is at least 18, and no one is there as a result of force, coercion, or desperation. In theory, state-funded feminist porn avoids the degradation and exploitation the mainstream, commercial porn industry propagates.
Sweden poses (as usual) a creative solution to the problem of human trafficking and exploitation of women and children in the porn industry, but one with flaws as transparent as the costumes in these films. First of all, what exactly is "feminist porn?" Just like men in the mainstream porn market demand different things from their porn, so would women as porn consumers. Who gets to decide what makes a feminist hot? Secondly, the success of this initiative is based on the assumption that all women in the porn industry will act ethically and respect other women by not exploiting them. I got news for you Sweden -- women traffic other women and girls into prostitution and porn, too. I wish ending exploitation in pornography were as easy as funding feminists to make their own porn, but the fact is women can commit crimes of exploitation just like men. And finally, isn't there a better use for this money? Out of all the ways we can end exploitation and improve equality for women, is making more porn really the answer? I'm not sure it is.
Regardless of whether or not the porn initiative is effective, or whether Swedes decide that it's a good use of their tax dollars, Sweden's idea poses some interesting philosophical questions. If you could somehow make society gender-equal, would porn cease to be exploitative? Is using tax dollars to fund pornography ethical if the goal of that pornography is to represent a traditionally marginalized group? Pornography, like art, has always been a subjective category. But does that reduce its value in achieving social equality?
This initiative might have a prayer in Sweden, but I can safely predict it won't take in the U.S. Unless, of course, we manage to sneak a provision for feminist porn into the new health care reform bill that everyone's already skimming and arguing about. And that would bring a whole new meaning to Republican complaints of getting screwed by the government on health care reform.
Photo credit: pnoeric
