SINGAPORE & SEX TRAFFICKING

The New York Times, which today also offers an editorial on Prime Minister Lee's need to move more quickly in liberalizing Singapore (registration required), notes that the government here is upset with the U.S. State Department's inclusion of the island on a list of countries where human sex trafficking is a problem (registration required):

SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Singapore has questioned a U.S. government assessment that it has become a sex slave center and asked Washington to back its charges with evidence.
The State Department's annual report on human trafficking says Singapore has a ``significant'' trafficking problem with more than 100 women and girls sent to the wealthy Southeast Asian island-state every year.
Citing new information, Washington put Singapore on par with Cambodia, China and Indonesia as ``countries that do not fully comply with the minimum standards'' to eliminate trafficking of women and girls for sex.

Singapore, as previously noted, has legalized red light zones and licensed prostitutes. In theory - given that these zones are overseen by police and health authorities - 'illegal' human trafficking should be less of a problem than it is elsewhere in Asia ( this is just logic - illegal marijuana sales, for instance, would not be that much of a problem in Amsterdam).

That said, there are regular prosecutions - and stiff sentences - for cases where there has been evidence of forced prostitution. It is not something the authorities here turn a blind eye to or take lightly.

Still, to be fair to Foggy Bottom, the report uses far stronger language about the failings of most of Singapore's Asia-Pacific neighbors. Judging from the report's final paragraph on the island, I suspect this is a bit of gentle pressure to get Singapore to ratify the Stockholm convention on the prohibition of child sex – something that I've argued would have very little real downside. The State Department notes:

Singapore should consider adopting stronger anti-trafficking (for sexual exploitation) laws, and improved victim protection measures. It should also engage more with international and regional bodies involved in anti-trafficking activities. Singapore does not face the resource constraints of its neighbors and therefore has the capacity to increase funding for prevention and protection efforts.

Another area where the U.S. has complaints, and where my libertarianism is clashing with my Catholic upbringing, is the island's age of consent:

The United States also highlighted a number of sex-trade issues in Singapore, noting in particular that sex with prostitutes aged 16-17 was legal. Singapore explained this partly as a reflection of different values.
``Given the different cultural values and societal norms, different countries will adopt different cut-off ages with regards to the protection of minors,'' it said.
``There is no evidence to suggest that persons between 16 and 18 years old are as vulnerable as those below the age of 16.''

While I can accept that the age of consent should differ from country to country, prostitution can be a dangerous business - even in highly regulated Singapore. There is no need to have the same low age of consent for sex workers.

People are prohibited from smoking here until they turn 18, so there is no logical dissonance with saying that people younger than 18 can't fuck for money.

The State Department report is here.

The Singapore ministry's response is here.