CNA Staff, Dec 14, 2020 / 06:07 pm (CNA).- After legislation aiming to counter forced labor in the Chinese province of Xinjiang saw success in the U.S. House of Representatives, significant corporate lobbying has targeted the legislation in the Senate.
Critics have characterized the lobbying as an effort to weaken the bill, while several major companies have argued their policies already seek to remove forced labor from their supply chains.
The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act passed the House on Sept. 22 by a vote of 406-3.
The legislation would treat all goods imported from China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region in the far west as being created with forced labor, unless certified otherwise by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. It would also require disclosures from businesses that engage with Chinese companies and would authorize sanctions on anyone determined to be responsible for labor trafficking of Uyghurs.
An estimated 1 million or more Uyghurs, members of a Muslim ethnoreligious minority group, have been detained in “re-education camps” in Xinjiang, which were first spotted on satellite imagery in 2017.
The Chinese government at one time denied the camps existed, but has since shifted to defending its actions as an appropriate terrorism prevention measure.
Those inside the camps are reportedly subjected to forced labor, torture, and political indoctrination. Women who have been imprisoned in the camps have told stories of forced abortions and sterilizations.
The Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act notes that the U.S. State Department determined in its 2019 human trafficking report that subsidies are offered to Chinese companies for opening factories near the internment camps.
If passed and signed into law, the bill would instruct the Secretary of State to determine whether the treatment of Uyghurs inside the internment camps constitutes genocide or other crimes against humanity, and to create a plan of response.
The Congressional-Executive Commission on China, a bipartisan group of legislators, issued a March report listing companies that have been suspected of using forced labor in Xinjiang. These include Adidas, Calvin Klein, Campbell Soup Company, Coca-Cola, Costco, H&M, Nike, Patagonia, and Tommy Hilfiger among others.
Some companies are lobbying to have their names removed from the forced labor prevention bill, which specifically accuses them of using forced labor from Xinjiang.
Lobbyists from multinational companies and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have criticized the bill and dedicated resources to changing it, The New York Times and Washington Post reported last month.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce joined seven other industry groups in a November letter saying they have a history of fighting forced labor. They advocated a comprehensive effort using the presidential administration, Congress, and foreign governments to address forced labor.
Critics of the bill worry it creates a “presumption of forced labor” which is difficult for accused companies to counter. Human rights advocates say that China has transferred Uyghur Muslims out of Xinjiang to work elsewhere in the country and it is difficult for any U.S. company with operations in China to ensure it isn’t benefiting from forced labor.
A March report from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute said O-Film Technology, a contractor for Apple, Microsoft and Google, among other companies, has received at least 700 Uyghur workers as part of a program that aims to “gradually alter their ideology.”
Foxconn Technology and other suppliers of Apple take part in similar employment programs.
Apple has suggested changes to the bill like extending compliance deadlines, releasing some supply chain information to congressional committees rather than to the public, and requiring the U.S. government to designate Chinese entities that help surveil or detain Uyghurs and other minority groups in Xinjiang, the New York Times reports.
Apple has disputed claims it wants to weaken the proposed law. The company said it backs stronger regulation and wants the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act to become law, the New York Times reports. The company claims to have the strongest supplier conduct code in its industry, and its assessments include surprise audits.
“Looking for the presence of forced labor is part of every supplier assessment we conduct and any violations of our policies carry immediate consequences, including business termination,” Apple said in a statement.
“Earlier this year, we conducted a detailed investigation with our suppliers in China and found no evidence of forced labor on Apple production lines and we are continuing to monitor this closely.”
However, Cathy Feingold, director of the international department for the AFL-CIO labor union, countered that “What Apple would like is we all just sit and talk and not have any real consequences.”
“They’re shocked because it’s the first time where there could be some actual effective enforceability,” she told the Washington Post.
Xinjiang produces raw materials including cotton, coal, sugar, tomatoes and polysilicon. Its workforce includes apparel and footwear factory workers.
Nike has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in 2020 to lobby Congress and government agencies on Xinjiang-related legislation, and Coca-Cola’s millions in lobbying expenditures include lobbying on the act. In March Nike said its products do not have sources in Xinjiang and it has confirmed its suppliers do not use yarn or textiles from the region.
Nike said that a factory in Qingdao, a major city in the eastern Shangdong province, stopped hiring new workers from Xinjiang in 2019, citing an independent audit’s reports that there were no Xinjiang employees there. However, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute report cited state media reports indicating around 800 Uyghur workers were there at the end of 2019 and made over seven million pairs of Nike shoes each year.
The Trump administration has taken action to block the import of some goods from the Xinjiang region and to sanction companies growing cotton in the area.
However, lawmakers sought additional action to respond to concerns that companies are profiting from the forced labor taking place in the internment camps, which have been compared to the concentration camps under Nazi Germany.
U.S. law already bars the importation of goods made with forced labor, but the law is rarely enforced and violations are hard to prove, the Washington Post said.
[…]
Honor to this President for standing up for Palestinian rights and for warning our nation against the inordinate influence of Israel.
May God grant salvation to President Jimmy Carter.
Yes, let’s pray for his soul. But let’s not forget that Carter—in addition to being pro-abortion, pro-“gay marriage”, and slanderous towards pro-lifers—praised Castro and Cuba, China, Tito (“a man who believes in human rights”), Kim Il Sung, Yasser Arafat, and the PLO, Mengistu, Cédras, Assad, and Hamas. Jimmy was most inept (whereas Joe is mostly corrupt), but he was also a sanctimonious embarrassment far more often than his hagiographers (that is, the legacy media) will ever admit. For more, see my July 2009 post at Insight Scoop.
Upon Carter’s election, the astute and long-time Singapore President Lee Qwan Yew wrote (of world leaders) in his own autobiography, “we knew we would just have to put up with him for four years.”
And, on the domestic scene, we recall that it was President Carter who gave us the cabinet-level position U.S. Department of Education, surely as a reward to the teachers’ unions that helped him get elected (formed on May 4, 1980, as a result of the Department of Education Organization Act–Public Law 96-88–of October 1979; President Jimmy Carter signed the bill into law.) The gift that keeps on giving.
Educationally speaking, Shakespeare gives us a clue: “The fault is not in our ‘stars,’ but in ourselves” (“Julius Caesar”). That is, the fault is not in those who are elected but in those who elect them. The corporate Peter Principle transferred to the gummint.
Yes, the establishment of the Department of Education was foolish. Yet, who kept it going, despite, as I recall, promises to the contrary? Oh, yeah, his successor, that “great conservative” Ronald Reagan.
Bravo! Sick to death of the hagiographies popping up everywhere.
Not that Pres. Carter endorsed this policy, but something to keep in mind from the late, great Huey Long:
“I don’t know much about Hitler. Except that last thing, about the Jews. There has never been a country that put its heel down on the Jews that ever lived afterwards.”
— Huey Long
For all his faults, Huey had some wise insights. May he & Jimmy Carter rest in peace.
Palestine must earn nationhood. Terrorism must never be rewarded. For over three quarters of a century, the only thing that Palestinians have excelled in is their ability to inflict incalculable suffering on a global scale, not only on others, but also on themselves.
It will only be by a direct intervention from God Himself that the hearts and minds of radical Islam will be converted.
It is for this we must pray.
Aside from rationalizing numerous acts of Islamic terrorism, possibly to downplay and make his years of cowardice not seem so bad while president, the post-president, “great humanitarian,” Carter met with leaders of the terrorist group Hamas. He embraced Nasser al-Shaer, the man who ran the Palestinian education system, brainwashing children into believing Jews are the descendants of pigs and dogs. He laid a wreath at the grave of Yasser Arafat, the most notorious terrorist thug of the 20th century.
Oh I forgot. Francis seems to indicate the Islamic world can’t do much that is morally wrong. He once reminded us that beheading children was the equivalent of domestic abuse, which he assumed was done by Catholic men since he read it in an Italian newspaper.
Freemasons defend the reputation of fellow members. Not suggesting that is what Bergoglio is doing at all, what so ever.
Thanks for your counter-witness, Carl. I confess my (naive) views of Carter have hitherto been based on the so-called mainstream media.
If Carter was mainly inept, what does that make Francis with his (supposed) assessment of him?
I volunteered in Jimmy Carter’s campaign & he was the first president I ever voted for . (And the last Democrat.) He really was a decent & faithful man in many ways but a very incompetent president.
In the beginning we believed he was a solid Christian believer but over time he veered off in some strange directions. God rest his soul.
Good question. I think there are a few factors involved. First, Pope Francis had to say something nice; it would be uncharitable to do otherwise. Secondly, Francis (I’m guessing) knows very little about Carter’s faith, life, policies, etc. Some of that is to be expected, as the Pope isn’t supposed to be an expert on all previous and current world leaders. But, thirdly, his remarks (praising “the deep faith” of Carter) just follow the standard, mainstream line, which is par for this pope and his inner circle. Fourth, I think that Francis is so keen on politics and political gestures that he probably believes Carter was a good president of deep faith. After all, that’s what the media legacy is trying to feed us here, even though the record says otherwise. Fifth, I think both men, in real ways, are 1970s liberals who have “evolved” on certain stances. Carter (as noted already) ended up embracing a hazy form of liberal Protestantism—or, better, of Protestantized liberalism—and jettisoned core moral beliefs, which in turn meant dismissing any sort of traditional, biblical Christian anthropology.
The bottom line, for me, is that Carter was mostly a disaster as POTUS and while he did some good things afterwards, he was a pro-tyrannical, pro-abortion, pro-“gay marriage”, post-1970s liberal whose Christianity was thin at best.
Carter’s was a failed presidency and American voters rejected him and his policies. I find it amusing and laughable how the leftists (inclusing Bergoglio) are tripping over themselves to canonize this man. Some of us are not fooled by the posturing. The guy was book smart but had the leadership skills of an idiot.
Carter was not a good President. I voted against him twice. He let the Iranian Shiite fanatics push him around, that said, he did become a decent ex President with the Habitat for Humanity business. I recall seeing a picture of him years ago, after he left the White House, wearing a tool belt and hammering nails at a construction site. I thought that was nice that he found some task that he can accomplish.
🤭
Agreed on his presidency. It was, overall, a train wreck. Carter was a nice guy, and that meant that he did some nice and good things. But “nice” isn’t the same as principled or strong, and Carter (in my estimation) was neither of those.
Jimmy Carter’s single greatest accomplishment was in giving the United States of America eight years of Reagan.
👍
I took your recommendation, Carl, and read your 2009 article. I believe I am now sufficiently inocculated against the current media and papal hagiography.
I do think Habitat for Humanity does good work.
Respectful farewell to Jimmy Carter. RIP.