GSP Benefits for Myanmar Must Hinge on Further Political Reforms, Stakeholders Tell USTR

Some stakeholders said they supported extending GSP only if the President agrees to review the country’s progress within a year of providing benefits. Reinstatement of GSP for Myanmar (Burma) -- the country lost GSP benefits in 1989 because of worker rights violations -- should be “subject to the continued monitoring of compliance,” said comments from the AFL-CIO. While the country has made strides to eliminate forced labor and allow trade unions, Myanmar’s military can retract the new rules at any time, AFL-CIO said

Reinstating Myanmar "to the GSP system should remain contingent upon [its government] making consistent and measurable progress towards entrenching [Freedom of Association] and collective bargaining rights,” along with “strict compliance” with the International Labor Organization agreement to end forced labor, the group said. The International Intellectual Property Alliance agreed, citing continuing concerns over intellectual property rights protection, market access and barriers to trade in copyright related goods and services in Myanmar.

Other groups advocated against GSP benefits altogether. “Crony capitalism, lack of transparency, ongoing conflict and land grabs have been noted by numerous international observers as ongoing problems indicating that rule of law has yet to take hold in [Myanmar],” said comments from the United States Campaign for Burma, a nonprofit that works to promote human rights in the country. The group said there are still numerous accounts of human rights violations and child labor, as well as a lack of business transparency; all of which should prevent extending GSP. And since the U.S. waived its import ban for Myanmar in April 2012, “it is particularly important that other relevant policy tools such as GSP be used to restore some leverage in the U.S.-Burma relationship so that labor and human rights remain a mandatory priority,” the group said.

Another nonprofit group, the Burma Fund, echoed this concern. While U.S. support for Myanmar’s democratic transition is beneficial, the removal of restrictive trade measures, coupled with the European Union’s withdrawal of sanctions, show the international community is “rushing too fast to reward Burmese authorities and their cronies too much,” the Burma Fund said. “We are not sure whether the international community really understands the recalcitrant nature and mindset of the former and current military authorities.”

Not all commenters sounded an alarm, however. The Retail Industry Leaders Association and the New York-based law firm Herzfeld & Rubin -- in the process of opening the only U.S.-based law office in Myanmar -- said the country does qualify for GSP due to its ongoing economic, political and social reforms. The RILA supported the inclusion of both Myanmar and Laos in GSP. (Though the USTR is reviewing GSP potential for both, most comments dealt solely with Myanmar. Laos has never been a GSP beneficiary developing country.) The benefits will reinforce support for U.S. companies, boost sales of American goods and services and spark further reforms, RILA said. In Myanmar, GSP can “incentivize more foreign investment, which would also bring stronger corporate social responsibility requirements and positively impact the worker rights landscape in beneficiary countries,” the group said. Read all the comments submitted to USTR (here).