The 2008 Presidential Campaign – step one During the race for the White House the issue of trafficking was addressed, although rather quietly and

The 2008 Presidential Campaign – step one During the race for the White House the issue of trafficking was addressed, although rather quietly and

somewhat differently, by both presidential candidates, Barack Obama and John McCain. Senator Obama called for trafficking to become ‘a top priority’ as an issue that has a ‘bipartisan agreement’ (Obama 2008), recognising that

‘[s]adly, there are thousands who are trapped in various forms of enslavement … often times young women who are caught up in prostitution. So, we’ve got to give prosecutors the tools to crack down on these human trafficking networks’ (US Department of State 2009:2).

Senator John McCain, in line with prioritising sex trafficking by identifying that ‘destitute women and children who are sold into bondage as sex slaves’, offered a ‘vision for defending the freedom and dignity of the world’s vulnerable’ (McCain 2008:1). This was to be achieved by prosecuting sex traffickers and fighting internet child pornography through the establishment of an inter-agency task-force with a focus on the prosecution of traffickers and rescuing victims which, it has to be noted, already existed (Ambruster 2008). The outcome of the race is well known, but the candidates’ corresponding standpoint on trafficking was certainly not the tipping point.

Two months after the elections and couple of weeks before the inauguration of the 44 th president of the United States, the above mentioned New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof called then president-

elect Barack Obama to become a leader of a ‘new abolitionist movement against 21 st century slavery – like the trafficking of girls into brothels’ (Kristof 2009). The Obama administration, however, was rather

cautious in addressing the issue. On June 16 th 2009 the U.S. State Department published its annual Trafficking in Persons (TIP) report.

Widely recognised as a significant tool for political pressure that can result in a withholding of ‘nonhumanitarian, non-trade related foreign assistance’ (US Department of State 2009:6), the 2009 TIP report was the first official document released by Obama’s administration that directly addresses the issue of trafficking.

Trafficking in Persons Report – step two For analysts and scholars familiar with TIP report there were some apparent changes in its appearance and content, indicating the potential shift in the approach the new administration might take in addressing trafficking. For example, in her opening remarks Secretary of State Hilary Clinton indicated that the Obama administration would build on the work of the former Clinton administration, rather than their immediate predecessor. She confirmed this standpoint by indicating that ‘[s]ince President Clinton issued the first U.S. Government policy against human trafficking in 1998, we have seen unprecedented forward movement … in the fight to end human trafficking’ (US Department of State 2009:1). However, it could be argued that such a shift could mean more than just discontinuity with the George W. Bush’s trafficking policy.

Instead of “combating the evil” rhetoric that was predominant in the previous years (e.g. US Department of State 2007, 2008), with the TIP report probing ‘even the darkest places, calling to account any country, friend or foe, that is not doing enough to combat human trafficking’ (US Department of State 2007:1), the U.S. now offers “partnership” in dealing with the issue (US Department of State 2009:1-2; Clinton 2009a).

Moreover, while the new TIP report contains some “guesstimates” 2 , the usage of such numbers has significantly reduced compared to previous years. In addition, a new “urgency” in relation to the numbers

of those trafficked is identified to be an ongoing financial crisis that ‘takes an increasing toll on many of the world’s migrants – who often risk everything for the slim hope of a better future for their families’ (US Department of State 2009:1).

More importantly, however, this is the first TIP report that acknowledges that labour trafficking, and not sex trafficking, claims the highest number of victims. Also noticeably, the new TIP report and in particular Secretary of State Hilary Clinton moved away from focusing on the sex industry as a root cause of trafficking, as was the standpoint of the previous administration. Clinton instead pinpoints ‘migrant workers [who are] forced to work against their will by employers who abuse legal processes’ (US Department of State 2009:1). This is an encouraging shift in the trafficking policy, particularly having in mind what Ann Jordan calls “another version of global gag rule” (cited in Block 2004:35) – the refusal of the former US administration to fund various international projects and research that did not explicitly

adopt abolitionist standpoint on trafficking, and rejected the notion of sex work as labour. 3

However, it also has to be noted here that some of the old habits remain. A robust rhetoric, especially in relation to “modern-day slavery”, trauma, the subsequent “rescue” of victims, and “greed” of traffickers is still present in the TIP report (US Department of State 2009:1-2). Moreover, the “Three P’s” and “Three R’s” framework - namely prosecution, protection and prevention of trafficking, and rescue, rehabilitation and reintegration of victims – remain the imperative (US Department of State 2009:6), as punishing traffickers and ‘[f]reeing victims from this form of modern-day slavery is the ultimate goal of this report – and of the U.S. Government’s anti-human trafficking policy’ (US Department of State 2009:5). Nation states rated in the report are still assessed by ‘concrete actions by the government’, that is the number of prosecutions, convictions and prison sentences handed down on traffickers, rather then number of conferences and task forces established to fight it (US Department of State 2009:10). In addition, very

2 The 2009 report acknowledges the estimate by International Labour Organization that ‘at least 12.3 million adults and children [are] in forced labour, bonded labour, and commercial sexual servitude at any given time’, with ‘at least 1.39

million are victims of commercial sexual servitude’ and 56 percent are women and girls (US Department of State 2009:8). 3 The United States funds 140 anti-trafficking programs in almost 70 countries around the world and 42 domestic task-

forces (Clinton 2009a).

little to no recognition is given to criminogenic conditions around trafficking created by states of the Global North and their efforts that often end at the border. Rather, the focus is on, for example, ‘fraudulent recruiters, employers and corrupt officials’ as important players that have to be tackled in order to ‘explain this tragedy’ (US Department of State 2009:9). Finally, the complex realities of those trafficked remain very much on the margins, while the simplified dichotomy of “sex slaves” still lingers in new administration’s rhetoric (Clinton 2009a). The disparity in the policy design and the reality of exploitative practices including the experiences, needs and perspectives of those trafficked (see Doezema 2000; Weitzer 2007; Segrave et al 2009; Milivojevic & Pickering 2008) are still the missing pieces in the trafficking puzzle.