Certainly not the root of the problem........
With the right leverage....possibly the right change...?
Trafficking challenges state's control over their borders and their ability to determine who will reside on their territory. It undermines states because trafficking can only survive with the corruption and complicity of government officials (Shelley, 2010).
"The trafficking of women is a perversion of the interaction of politics and economics and it proves globalization to be a process by which humans may be commodified in the most demoralizing ways" (Bertone, 2000).
"The trafficking of women is a perversion of the interaction of politics and economics and it proves globalization to be a process by which humans may be commodified in the most demoralizing ways" (Bertone, 2000).
“The international political economy of sex not only includes the supply side—the women of the third world, the poor states, but it cannot maintain itself without the demand from the organizers of the trade—men from industrialized and developing countries… the patriarchal world system hungers for and sustains the international subculture of docile women from underdeveloped nations” (Bertone, 2000).
Sex trafficking is effectively perpetuated within the lack of states and governments’ abilities and more strongly among their undecidedness. Smith (2011) positions this idea saying “we know that states are notoriously slow and conservative in adapting their practices and generally reluctant to create treaties that assuage their sovereignty, yet the slavery label for trafficking victims is appropriate for modern practices possessing all the hallmarks of slavery (short of ownership).”
Sex trafficking is effectively perpetuated within the lack of states and governments’ abilities and more strongly among their undecidedness. Smith (2011) positions this idea saying “we know that states are notoriously slow and conservative in adapting their practices and generally reluctant to create treaties that assuage their sovereignty, yet the slavery label for trafficking victims is appropriate for modern practices possessing all the hallmarks of slavery (short of ownership).”
Current anti-trafficking laws contradict and undermine the processes within international on domestic efforts to battle human trafficking. Historically, governments have been reluctant in their efforts to collect validated and useful data, this holds true even since the 2000 passage of the Palermo Protocol. Although The Palermo Protocol represents the first modern slave initiative to address human trafficking at the global level passed within the international community, the protocol primarily obliges states to criminalize trafficking and does not address factors contributing to the prevalence of transitional sex trafficking, such as the economic structures that perpetuate sex trafficking and the obligations for states to specifically provide assistance to the victims (Smith, 2011).
Despite the protocol’s definition and intent, the lack of common and accepted definitional terms continues to create confusion for how governments and NGOs should proceed in the battle against human trafficking, functions and roles of these entities and the increased difficulty in obtaining accurate data regarding trafficked persons.
Although,“the Veil is slowly lifting on Human trafficking trends and governments are starting to keep track of prosecutions and the number of victims assisted, however “political obstacles remain because governments have incentives to under report incidences of sex trafficking, potentially limited resources to effectively collect data and strong incentives to exaggerate their efforts to curb the problem” (Smith 2011). Furthermore, “governments’ reluctance to abdicate sovereignty contributed to the vague commitment contained in the Palermo Protocol. Putting it simply Smith concludes that “the heightened global attention surrounding human sex trafficking has created an enforcement gap—encouraging governments to pass laws but not to rigorously enforce them” (Smith 2011). Smith supports this fact stating that “among the 69 governments that have passed domestic anit-trafficking legislation since 2000, 40% have yet to enforce those laws and convict a single trafficker” (UNODC 2009, as cited in Smith 2011).
The unwillingness to explore a compromise among the political actors and decision makers has led to ineffective policy development, demonstrated by the two year negotiation process it took for political agreement on the internxational definition of sex trafficking (the process of defining the Palermo Protocol started in 1998 and finished in 2000) (Segrave,& Milivojevic,(2005).
International efforts to address human sex trafficking are undermined explicitly through internal weakness within the actual boundaries of the international organizations. For instance in 2007, more than 100 Sri Lankan Peacekeepers were expelled from their duties within the Haitian government as a consequence for patronizing prostitution and other UN Peacekeepers have become notorious in their patronage of prostitutes and trafficking victims in identified crisis zones (Smith 2011).
The Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons within the USDOS monitors international efforts to combat human trafficking, and maintains an annual report that reviews and ranks the efforts of those nations that are determined as counties of origin transit or destination of a significant numbers of victims of severe forms of trafficking. Countries are ranked and monitored. Over time countries will receive a negative assessment if the country fails to take actions to come into compliance with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking. This negative assessment consequently triggers the withholding of non-humanitarian, non-trade related assistance from the United States.
Although I understand the low cost and high demand of transporting and harboring the victims plays a significant role in the demand and amount of victims within this system, I wish I could have developed a greater understanding of the globalization aspect of this system. I am extremely frustrated with the fact that we are talking about human lives, the overwhelming majority being women and children. I don’t yet understand how this can remain within the “reluctant” grips of the government, state and international organizations that are unwilling to aggressively move forward and start making right from this wrong!
Despite the protocol’s definition and intent, the lack of common and accepted definitional terms continues to create confusion for how governments and NGOs should proceed in the battle against human trafficking, functions and roles of these entities and the increased difficulty in obtaining accurate data regarding trafficked persons.
Although,“the Veil is slowly lifting on Human trafficking trends and governments are starting to keep track of prosecutions and the number of victims assisted, however “political obstacles remain because governments have incentives to under report incidences of sex trafficking, potentially limited resources to effectively collect data and strong incentives to exaggerate their efforts to curb the problem” (Smith 2011). Furthermore, “governments’ reluctance to abdicate sovereignty contributed to the vague commitment contained in the Palermo Protocol. Putting it simply Smith concludes that “the heightened global attention surrounding human sex trafficking has created an enforcement gap—encouraging governments to pass laws but not to rigorously enforce them” (Smith 2011). Smith supports this fact stating that “among the 69 governments that have passed domestic anit-trafficking legislation since 2000, 40% have yet to enforce those laws and convict a single trafficker” (UNODC 2009, as cited in Smith 2011).
The unwillingness to explore a compromise among the political actors and decision makers has led to ineffective policy development, demonstrated by the two year negotiation process it took for political agreement on the internxational definition of sex trafficking (the process of defining the Palermo Protocol started in 1998 and finished in 2000) (Segrave,& Milivojevic,(2005).
International efforts to address human sex trafficking are undermined explicitly through internal weakness within the actual boundaries of the international organizations. For instance in 2007, more than 100 Sri Lankan Peacekeepers were expelled from their duties within the Haitian government as a consequence for patronizing prostitution and other UN Peacekeepers have become notorious in their patronage of prostitutes and trafficking victims in identified crisis zones (Smith 2011).
The Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons within the USDOS monitors international efforts to combat human trafficking, and maintains an annual report that reviews and ranks the efforts of those nations that are determined as counties of origin transit or destination of a significant numbers of victims of severe forms of trafficking. Countries are ranked and monitored. Over time countries will receive a negative assessment if the country fails to take actions to come into compliance with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking. This negative assessment consequently triggers the withholding of non-humanitarian, non-trade related assistance from the United States.
Although I understand the low cost and high demand of transporting and harboring the victims plays a significant role in the demand and amount of victims within this system, I wish I could have developed a greater understanding of the globalization aspect of this system. I am extremely frustrated with the fact that we are talking about human lives, the overwhelming majority being women and children. I don’t yet understand how this can remain within the “reluctant” grips of the government, state and international organizations that are unwilling to aggressively move forward and start making right from this wrong!