Human trafficking in Iraq and Afghanistan, paid for by US tax dollars
November 16, 2014 2:16 PM   Subscribe

"We protect women and children, but these are dark-skinned men.... "

It is not surprising that labor trafficking is seen as a lesser evil than sex trafficking. The argument often goes: Is it really so bad to charge a worker in India a one-time fee in exchange for a job overseas with higher wages than he could find in his own country? But recruitment fees essentially create a system of indentured servitude. Workers usually take out high-interest loans in their home country to pay the fee, and the payments can trap them in their new jobs. Recruiters often mislead workers about their salary and the location of their job—promises of high-paying jobs in Jordanian hotels turn into custodial positions on U.S. military bases in warzones.

"The government says it has a zero tolerance policy, and yet there’s fairly credible allegations that these guys have been involved in trafficking and they continue to win government contracts,” says Steven Watt, a human rights attorney at the ACLU. “It’s pretty far from a zero tolerance policy.”

McCahon is more blunt: “This is the only situation in which the government uses U.S. tax dollars to fund human trafficking,” he says. “It’s not that we’re idly sitting by; we’re actively paying for it. It’s like the U.S. government is the John, telling the pimp, ‘We need bodies here, but we aren’t going to look at how you got them, or if they are even getting paid.’” . . .

He cited one case where an Indian college graduate named Ramesh paid $5,000 upfront to an agent who promised an $800 per month salary to work for a U.S. contractor in Iraq. Once in Iraq, he was only offered $150 per month, but took the job because he felt he had no other choice. When the loan shark became dissatisfied with the repayment rate, he sexually assaulted Ramesh’s sister. His sister hung herself and his mother fell into a state of shock. When Ramesh returned home to India, he and his surviving family members poisoned themselves.

While labor trafficking is clearly a human rights issue, McCahon is quick to point out that recruitment fees are also procurement fraud. Under the current contract, Dyncorp and Fluor pay Ecolog to bring them a specified number of workers. The contractors assume responsibility for transporting and housing their workers and are reimbursed by the government for the associated costs. “So if a subcontractor brings over 8,000 workers, and each worker comes with a $2,500 recruitment fee, that’s a $20 million black money kickback,” explained McCahon. “This is the largest contract fraud in the history of reconstruction.” The Army reimburses Dyncorp and Fluor for all of their allowable costs, plus 3 to 6 percent of their costs as profit—so the higher the costs, the higher the profit . . .

No contractor has ever been disciplined for a trafficking violation under the current Federal Acquisition Regulation, the set of rules for government purchases of goods and services. This means that even though there has been evidence of contractors violating anti-trafficking rules, there is no official negative past performance record, so they continue to be eligible to receive top-dollar government contracts.


That article from The New Republic gives you 9 more links with background information about human trafficking by US government contractors, including this 98-page ACLU report from 2012 (not 2011, as the article says) which "aims to provide a comprehensive account of the ongoing trafficking, deceptive recruitment, forced labor and abuse of TCNs [third-country nationals] serving under U.S. Government contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan." (PDF link.)

Metafilter has been following this issue for a decade now: 2011, 2005, and another from 2005.
posted by John Cohen (5 comments total) 22 users marked this as a favorite
 
> "Is it really so bad to charge a worker in India a one-time fee in exchange for a job overseas with higher wages than he could find in his own country?"

Yes.
posted by kyrademon at 2:51 PM on November 16, 2014 [4 favorites]


"We protect women and children, but these are dark-skinned men.... "
No, we really don't even do that. But that derail aside, this is horrifying at nearly every level.
posted by Nerd of the North at 2:52 PM on November 16, 2014 [10 favorites]


"We protect women and children, but these are dark-skinned men.... "

No, we really don't even do that.


You're right, that's an oversimplified attention-getter to make the point that these workers are predominantly male, perhaps explaining why there's less concern for them. Page 20 of the ACLU report I linked to talks about how the workers are typically men, but some are women. The ACLU report also has a section on "Sex Trafficking and Gender-Based Violence" (pages 33-34). The New Yorker article linked in the 2011 Mefi post is mainly about women.
posted by John Cohen at 3:04 PM on November 16, 2014


I'm as good at nihilism as anyone in the 21st century but I can't help but marvel as this is the second best/worst "Fascist US gov does corrupt things I should no longer be shocked to learn about, and yet I am"-type expose I've read this week!
posted by Fupped Duck at 3:05 PM on November 16, 2014 [8 favorites]


When the loan shark became dissatisfied with the repayment rate, he sexually assaulted Ramesh’s sister. His sister hung herself and his mother fell into a state of shock. When Ramesh returned home to India, he and his surviving family members poisoned themselves.

DUDE.

i seriously just said that out loud.

dude.

i'm like, 100% speechless. the world really fucking sucks sometimes. Everyone involved in letting this happen needs to be sent to a rendering plant.
posted by emptythought at 2:34 PM on November 17, 2014 [1 favorite]


« Older The ideology of musical notation   |   Nature Special: Futures, adding some fiction into... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments