EU tries to scrap Burma sanctions

THE EUROPEAN Union is going to court on behalf of multinational companies and banks who want to continue trading with the military regime in Burma.

To the dismay of human right activists and international trade unions the European Commission will open legal proceedings today in the Geneva- based World Trade Organisation (WTO) to force the US state of Massachusetts to do business with firms that trade with Burma.

In spite of the much vaunted "ethical" foreign policy of the Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, Britain stands behind the EU action. "This is not about Burma, it is about the United States and the application of international trade rules," a government spokeswoman said.

Massachusetts is refusing to award public contracts to companies that do business with or in Burma because of the country's appalling human rights record. Unilever, Siemens and the Dutch banks ING and ABN-Amro are among European companies that have been penalised by the ruling and which have lobbied Brussels in an attempt to thwart the sanctions.

A spokesman for Sir Leon Brittan, the EU trade commissioner, said: "The European Union is just as concerned about human right abuses in Burma as Massachusetts is, but this case is about the US breaking its world trade obligations."

The Commission rests its legal case on the claim that Massachusetts is imposing "political" rather than economic conditions when it awards public contracts, and that this constitutes a breach of WTO rules. Commission officials say the action is a test case.

They want to halt the proliferation of sanctions in the US being brought by the states, below the federal level. New York city, for example, has also imposed sanctions on Burma.

Critics say Brussels has picked the wrong issue on which to settle a legal score with the US. "If the actions of Massachusetts, which put the human rights of the Burmese people above the interests of a few multinational companies, do not comply with WTO rules, then the WTO rules need changing and not the actions of Massachusetts," Bill Jordan, general secretary of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, said.

Condemnation of the Burmese regime has been almost universal after crackdowns on dissident supporters of the opposition leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, and Britain has been calling for tougher EU sanctions.

The latest report on Burma from the International Labour Organisation has evidence of widespread and systematic use of forced labour on women, children and the elderly.

In such a climate there are fears that the EU action in Geneva will be seen as contradictory. "Burma is the wrong case to be taking to the WTO," said James Howard of the union confederation. "This is a case of the EU shooting itself in the foot. One arm has taken a range of sanctions against Burma but now another is taking a step which goes completely against world opinion.

"This is like a green light to the Burmese junta to carry on with its human rights violations."

The policy adopted by Massachusetts has already forced the American computer giant Apple to pull out of Burma and has shown that public procurement, even at city or state level, can be a powerful weapon in forcing multinationals to comply with ethical foreign policies.

"Massachusetts has shown itself much more in tune with public opinion and with the human rights concerns of consumers," Mr Howard said. "We would like to see the WTO rules changed."