Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08TASHKENT295
2008-03-07 09:20:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Embassy Tashkent
Cable title:
UZBEKISTAN GSP DEMARCHE DELIVERED
how-toVZCZCXRO8156 RR RUEHIK RUEHPOD RUEHYG DE RUEHNT #0295/01 0670920 ZNR UUUUU ZZH R 070920Z MAR 08 FM AMEMBASSY TASHKENT TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 9348 INFO RUEHZG/NATO EU COLLECTIVE RUEHKA/AMEMBASSY DHAKA 0254 RUEHIL/AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD 4000 RUEHBUL/AMEMBASSY KABUL 2270 RUEHLM/AMEMBASSY COLOMBO 0273 RUEHKT/AMEMBASSY KATHMANDU 0317 RUEHNE/AMEMBASSY NEW DELHI 0946 RUEHTA/AMEMBASSY ASTANA 0018 RUEHAH/AMEMBASSY ASHGABAT 3804 RUEHEK/AMEMBASSY BISHKEK 4420 RUEHDBU/AMEMBASSY DUSHANBE 0298 RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC RHEHNSC/NSC WASHINGTON DC RUEHRC/DEPT OF AGRICULTURE WASHDC RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC RUEHC/DEPT OF LABOR WASHDC RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 TASHKENT 000295
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ECON ELAB ETRD KIPR PGOV PREL SOCI UZ
SUBJECT: UZBEKISTAN GSP DEMARCHE DELIVERED
REF: A. A) TASHKENT 239
B. B) TASHKENT 234
C. C) STATE 10115
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 TASHKENT 000295
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ECON ELAB ETRD KIPR PGOV PREL SOCI UZ
SUBJECT: UZBEKISTAN GSP DEMARCHE DELIVERED
REF: A. A) TASHKENT 239
B. B) TASHKENT 234
C. C) STATE 10115
1. (SBU) Over the past five weeks, post has demarched Uzbek
officials from relevant ministries on the concerns raised ref
C. We have informed Uzbek officials in the Ministries of
Foreign Economic Relations and Foreign Affairs, as well as in
the Republican Copyright Agency, of the impending June 30
deadline for a recommendation by U.S. authorities on
disposition of outstanding petitions related the the
Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) program's application
to Uzbekistan.
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) protection
--------------
2. (SBU) On IPR protection, Uzbek officials have consistently
underscored their objections to removing the Uzbek
reservation to Berne Convention Article 18 at this time.
They have further narrowed the precise grounds of their
objections: the Copyright Agency maintains that Article 18
would require Uzbekistan to destroy cultural products that
might be subject retroactively to copyright protections
(e.g., Soviet era works derived from protected Western
works). The Copyright Agency also maintains that Uzbekistan
plans to pursue WTO membership and will, as a matter of
course, eventually withdraw its reservation.
3. (SBU) As reported ref A, the Uzbeks have made modest
progress on IPR enforcement under the terms of an IPR law
passed in 2006.
Cotton sector child labor
--------------
4. (SBU) On the child labor petition, both UNICEF and the ILO
operate in Uzbekistan and have presented post with a mixed
picture. On the one hand, both organizations tell us the
problem does not appear to be as widespread as some European
activists have recently claimed (ref B). On the other hand,
UNICEF believes that the use of child labor has increased as
a direct result of cotton sector market reforms (note:
reforms advocated by international and local specialists.
End note). This explanation was echoed recently by an AMCIT
involved in cotton ginning and seed production here. Both
UNICEF and ILO share our assessment that the Uzbeks would be
well advised to ratify ILO 182 and to generally increase
transparency on compliance with their international
commitments. UNICEF tells us that the Uzbek Government
recently approached both ILO and it for advice on dealing
with the growing international attention on this issue.
UNICEF considers this significant and has offered the GOU
recommendations, which the UNICEF Country Director tells us
the Uzbek Government is evaluating.
5. (SBU) Post advises Washington agencies to solicit the
views of the AMCIT executive director of the International
Cotton Advisory Council, a public international organization
to which both Uzbekistan and the U.S. belong. ICAC's website
is www.icac.org, and their secretariat can be reached at
secretariat@icac.org or 202-463-6660.
SIPDIS
Post recommendations
--------------
6. (SBU) In ref A (Special 301 report),post recommended that
GSP priveleges not be withdrawn. We repeat that
recommendation. Ref A focused on IPR concerns. Uzbek
arguments aside, the GOU is making modest progress. Perhaps
significantly, a senior Uzbek cleric told us recently how he
actually raised IPR protection in one of his sermons at
Tashkent's central mosque. He was upset that his own books
TASHKENT 00000295 002 OF 002
were being reproduced illegally. He noted that several
senior Government officials were in attendance and that a
well-publicized raid on a music store chain was conducted
shortly thereafter. Though not your run-of-the-mill story,
it follows closely the experience of many other countries:
when a local demand for protection of domestic works arises,
governments have a tendency to begin enforcing rights of
foreign producers as well.
7. (SBU) Post recommendation, continued: The child labor
contentions seem to us insufficiently developed to pursue
through the GSP petition process at this time. We recommend
that this petition be extended for another year.
NORLAND
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ECON ELAB ETRD KIPR PGOV PREL SOCI UZ
SUBJECT: UZBEKISTAN GSP DEMARCHE DELIVERED
REF: A. A) TASHKENT 239
B. B) TASHKENT 234
C. C) STATE 10115
1. (SBU) Over the past five weeks, post has demarched Uzbek
officials from relevant ministries on the concerns raised ref
C. We have informed Uzbek officials in the Ministries of
Foreign Economic Relations and Foreign Affairs, as well as in
the Republican Copyright Agency, of the impending June 30
deadline for a recommendation by U.S. authorities on
disposition of outstanding petitions related the the
Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) program's application
to Uzbekistan.
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) protection
--------------
2. (SBU) On IPR protection, Uzbek officials have consistently
underscored their objections to removing the Uzbek
reservation to Berne Convention Article 18 at this time.
They have further narrowed the precise grounds of their
objections: the Copyright Agency maintains that Article 18
would require Uzbekistan to destroy cultural products that
might be subject retroactively to copyright protections
(e.g., Soviet era works derived from protected Western
works). The Copyright Agency also maintains that Uzbekistan
plans to pursue WTO membership and will, as a matter of
course, eventually withdraw its reservation.
3. (SBU) As reported ref A, the Uzbeks have made modest
progress on IPR enforcement under the terms of an IPR law
passed in 2006.
Cotton sector child labor
--------------
4. (SBU) On the child labor petition, both UNICEF and the ILO
operate in Uzbekistan and have presented post with a mixed
picture. On the one hand, both organizations tell us the
problem does not appear to be as widespread as some European
activists have recently claimed (ref B). On the other hand,
UNICEF believes that the use of child labor has increased as
a direct result of cotton sector market reforms (note:
reforms advocated by international and local specialists.
End note). This explanation was echoed recently by an AMCIT
involved in cotton ginning and seed production here. Both
UNICEF and ILO share our assessment that the Uzbeks would be
well advised to ratify ILO 182 and to generally increase
transparency on compliance with their international
commitments. UNICEF tells us that the Uzbek Government
recently approached both ILO and it for advice on dealing
with the growing international attention on this issue.
UNICEF considers this significant and has offered the GOU
recommendations, which the UNICEF Country Director tells us
the Uzbek Government is evaluating.
5. (SBU) Post advises Washington agencies to solicit the
views of the AMCIT executive director of the International
Cotton Advisory Council, a public international organization
to which both Uzbekistan and the U.S. belong. ICAC's website
is www.icac.org, and their secretariat can be reached at
secretariat@icac.org or 202-463-6660.
SIPDIS
Post recommendations
--------------
6. (SBU) In ref A (Special 301 report),post recommended that
GSP priveleges not be withdrawn. We repeat that
recommendation. Ref A focused on IPR concerns. Uzbek
arguments aside, the GOU is making modest progress. Perhaps
significantly, a senior Uzbek cleric told us recently how he
actually raised IPR protection in one of his sermons at
Tashkent's central mosque. He was upset that his own books
TASHKENT 00000295 002 OF 002
were being reproduced illegally. He noted that several
senior Government officials were in attendance and that a
well-publicized raid on a music store chain was conducted
shortly thereafter. Though not your run-of-the-mill story,
it follows closely the experience of many other countries:
when a local demand for protection of domestic works arises,
governments have a tendency to begin enforcing rights of
foreign producers as well.
7. (SBU) Post recommendation, continued: The child labor
contentions seem to us insufficiently developed to pursue
through the GSP petition process at this time. We recommend
that this petition be extended for another year.
NORLAND