UZBEKISTAN: ACTIVISTS REPORTING UNRELIABLE CHILD LABOR DATA

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 05 TASHKENT 000453

SIPDIS SIPDIS
DEPT FOR SCA, DRL, AND G/TIP
DRL/ILCSR FOR TRACY HAILEY AND TU DANG
G/TIP FOR MEGAN HALL
DOL/ILAB FOR CHARITA CASTRO, TINA MCCARTER, AND SEROKA MIHAIL
AMEMBASSY BELGRADE PASS TO AMEMBASSY PODGORICA
AMEMBASSY ATHENS PASS TO AMCONSUL THESSALONIKI
AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PASS TO AMCONSUL YEKATERINBURG
AMEMBASSY HELSINKI PASS TO AMCONSUL ST PETERSBURG
AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PASS TO AMCONSUL VLADIVOSTOK

E.O. 12958: DECL: 2019-04-06
TAGS: PHUM ECON ELAB KPAO PGOV PREL SOCI UZ
SUBJECT: UZBEKISTAN: ACTIVISTS REPORTING UNRELIABLE CHILD LABOR DATA

REF: TASHKENT 73; TASHKENT 83

CLASSIFIED BY: Richard Fitzmaurice, Poloff; REASON: 1.4(B),(D)


1. (C) Summary: On March 30, the independent Ezgulik human rights
group released its report on child labor practices during the 2008
fall cotton harvest at a roundtable hosted by the British Embassy.
While Ezgulik announced that nearly a million Uzbek children
participated in the cotton harvest, their written report does not
back up that finding. Unreliable reporting from Ezgulik and other
activities has been cited (often without acknowledgement) by
researchers and NGOs outside the country, often misinforming their
advocacy efforts. Nevertheless, some of its findings tracked with
those made by more reliable observers. Ezgulik's analysis of the
factors driving the use of child labor during the cotton harvest
and its policy recommendations also were broadly similar to those
of UNICEF, the only international organization on the ground in
Tashkent currently engaging the Uzbek government on child labor
issues (ref A). End summary.



EZGULIK RELEASES CHILD LABOR REPORT AT BRITISH EMBASSY

-------------- --------------




2. (C) At a small roundtable on March 30 hosted by the British
Embassy, the independent Ezgulik human rights group released its
report on the use of child labor during the 2008 fall cotton
harvest. In their presentation, Ezgulik director (and Birlik
opposition party General Secretary) Vasilya Inoyatova and Ezgulik
deputy director (and Harakat.net journalist and editor) Abdurakhmon
Tashanov reported that 987,000 Uzbek students picked cotton during
the harvest in 2008. Tashanov further claimed that the number of
children participating in the harvest had increased since last year
and was growing each year (Comment: In a private conversation with
poloff last year, however, Inoyatova estimated that 1.2 million
Uzbek students participated in the 2007 cotton harvest. End
comment.)




3. (C) The roundtable was attended by one other independent
activist, Rapid Reaction Group member Sukhrob Ismoilov (who
participates with Inoyatova in periodic trainings for Uzbek human
rights activists conducted by Freedom House in Turkey),and local
employees of the French, Swiss, and British Embassies. Two foreign
diplomats attended (poloff and the Italian DCM),but no British
diplomats were present. Last year, Ezgulik received a grant from
the Embassy's Democracy Commission to conduct research for its
child labor and other reports.



EZGULIK'S REPORT DOES NOT BACK UP SOME OF THEIR FINDINGS

-------------- --------------




4. (C) Ezgulik's Russian-language report in no ways substantiates
its claim, made at the roundtable, that 987,000 Uzbek students
participated in the 2008 fall cotton harvest. The written report
does not provide an estimate of the number of Uzbek children who
participated in the harvest across the country, but instead reports

TASHKENT 00000453 002 OF 005


on the number of students who participated in the harvest from 15
specific schools in two districts of Samarkand and Bukhara
province. The report also includes summaries of interviews with 36
survey respondents from those regions, including ten school
students, ten parents, and six farmers. Last year, Ezgulik
anonymously released a similar report on the 2007 cotton harvest,
which was reportedly based on interviews with 141 persons in
several districts of Kashkadarya and Syrdarya provinces. In that
report, Ezgulik concluded that 199,000 students from Kashkadarya
province and 60,000 students from Syrdarya province were involved
in the 2007 cotton harvest.



EZGULIK GIVES CONFLICTING ACCOUNTS OF THEIR METHODOLOGY

-------------- --------------




5. (C) At the roundtable, Inoyatova and Tashanov claimed that
Ezgulik conducted its research by collecting observations made by
each of its 72 branch offices located throughout Uzbekistan.
However, in a private meeting with poloff on March 25, Inoyatova
reported that all of the research for their report was conducted by
12 Ezgulik activists - including herself, Tashanov, and several
regional representatives. She reported that these activists
traveled to the two districts of Samarkand and Bukhara province,
where a majority of the data was collected.




6. (C) Comment: We believe Inoyatova was being more truthful in
the private meeting. While Ezgulik claims to have 72 regional
branches, it has been our general observation that the organization
has a maximum of only about 12 to 20 committed activists inside
Uzbekistan. End comment.



GENERAL OBSERVATIONS FROM EZGULIK'S REPORT

--------------




7. (U) In its report, Ezgulik observed that students in the two
districts they visited were taken from schools to pick cotton with
authorization from local departments of education and that parental
permission was not required. A few students in the districts were
reportedly excused from picking cotton for medical reasons. In the
two districts, survey respondents told Ezgulik that schoolchildren
from grades six and higher (approximately ages 12 and older) picked
cotton approximately 9 hours a day, including a one-hour lunch
break. Farmers regularly provided lunch (either a hot meal or
snacks) to the students, as well as drinking water. They also
provided transportation for the students to the cotton fields and
back home each day. Students picking cotton were watched by their
teachers. Farmers paid students between 50 and 60 soums
(approximately .04 dollars) per kilo of cotton. Students were
expected to pick between 40 to 50 kilos of cotton a day at the
beginning of the cotton season and less as the season went on (as
there was less cotton to be picked in the fields).

TASHKENT 00000453 003 OF 005



8. (U) The schoolchildren reportedly told Ezgulik that they did
not mind picking cotton and missing school (this attitude, while
not universal among Uzbek students, is common, see ref B). Both
students and parents reported that students who refused to
participate in the cotton harvest would be criticized at schools,
while their parents would be looked down upon in the local
community.




9. (U) Ezgulik leaders also blamed poor working conditions for the
death of several students during the harvest. Their report cited
the case of a boy in Bukhara province who was hit by a tractor as
he was taking a nap in a cotton field, while another student
reportedly died after falling from a truck as he was being
transported to pick cotton. During their presentation, Ezgulik
leaders also cited the case of a student in Jizzakh province who
allegedly became ill with hepatitis while picking cotton and died
at a local hospital, a girl in Jizzakh province who allegedly hung
herself after being criticized by her teachers for not picking
enough cotton, and that of two students in Bukhara province who
were hit by a car and killed as they were walking to cotton fields
in 2007



SOME EZGULIK OBSERVATIONS TRACK WITH THOSE OF OTHERS

-------------- --------------




10. (C) Ezgulik reported several findings which tracked with those
made by more reliable sources this past fall (ref A). In their
report, Ezgulik states that students in the two districts they
visited picked cotton from approximately September 22 until early
November. In their presentation, though, Ezgulik leaders reported
that students in different areas of the country picked cotton for
varying lengths of time. Inoyatova estimated that most students
picking cotton did so for an average of about three to six weeks
(which also generally tracked with observations made this past fall
by international observers). Ezgulik also reported there was no
evidence that children were exposed to harmful chemicals or
pesticides, which it claimed were no longer being used to grow
cotton. International observers have noted that Uzbek farmers,
most of whom cannot afford expensive chemicals, have long relied
upon safer (and less expensive) organic methods of fertilization
and pest control (ref A).



GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS ALSO TRACK WITH THOSE OF UNICEF

-------------- --------------




11. (C) Ezgulik's analysis of the factors driving the use of child
labor during the cotton harvest and its recommendations for how to
combat it are also broadly similar to those of UNICEF, the only
international organization on the ground in Tashkent currently
engaging the Uzbek government on child labor issues. In their
presentation, Ezgulik's leaders blamed a variety of factors for the
persistent use of child labor during the cotton harvest. They

TASHKENT 00000453 004 OF 005


noted that poverty drove many Uzbek children to pick cotton to help
support their families. They also observed that the Uzbek
"national mentality" was an important contributing factor, as
children have been used to pick cotton in Uzbekistan for
generations and many Uzbeks see nothing wrong with the practice and
are unaware of laws prohibiting it. Ezgulik leaders also noted
that many private farmers have trouble during the harvest
attracting adult laborers, who often head abroad to neighboring
Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan during the cotton harvest, where wages
are higher. According to Ezgulik, Uzbek farmers are unable to pay
higher wages because the government pays them too low of a price
for their cotton.




12. (C) Ezgulik's leaders argued that the government's efforts to
combat child labor were likely to fail unless it adopted wholesale
reform of its agricultural system. In particular, Ezgulik's
leaders argued that the government needed to increase its
investment in the agricultural sector, including by paying farmers
higher prices for their cotton.



NGOS AND OTHERS DRAW UPON EZGULIK'S RESEARCH

--------------




13. (C) Ezgulik's observations on child labor in Uzbekistan in
previous years have been cited, often without full attribution, by
international NGOs and researchers focusing on child labor in
Uzbekistan, none of whom have personnel on the ground in Uzbekistan
to verify Ezgulik's results. For example, in a March 13 op-ed on
the Reuter's website, International Crisis Group (ICG) spokesman
Andrew Stroehlein reported that a new study from the University of
London's School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) allegedly
demonstrated that 2.7 million children in Uzbekistan are forced to
pick cotton each year (out of a total primary and secondary school
population of 5.1 million.) However, the "new" SOAS study,
entitled "Invisible to the World: The Dynamics of Forced Child
Labor in the Cotton Sector of Uzbekistan," is based almost entirely
on data from 2007 and earlier - some of it provided by Ezgulik and
other activists, though they are not cited by name. The only
sources cited from 2008 were from independent news websites
operated by exiled human rights activists and regime opponents,
which are frequently unreliable sources of information.



COMMENT

--------------




14. (C) We believe that Ezgulik is trying its best to report on
child labor practices in Uzbekistan under very difficult conditions
for activists. Nevertheless, Ezgulik's ability to objectively
report on child labor during the cotton harvest is hampered not
only by government interference in its activities, but also by its
small number of activists. Ezgulik also has a history of
overstating the results of its research, which is not surprising:
activists in Uzbekistan see their primary role as uncovering abuses

TASHKENT 00000453 005 OF 005


and pressuring the government to make changes, not as serving as
objective sources of information. Some NGOs and researchers
outside the country appear to take child labor reporting by Ezgulik
and other activists largely at face value and have no means to
verify it (though these NGOs can hardly be blamed for the Uzbek
government's refusal to allow them to operate inside the country.)
Still, despite the shortcomings of Ezgulik's methodology, we
generally agree with their analysis of the factors driving the use
of child labor in Uzbekistan and its recommendations on how to more
effectively combat the problem.




15. (C) One important point we need to continue to stress to Uzbek
officials is that it is their own interest to allow an independent
assessment of child labor practices in the country, as it likely to
show that some of the publicized findings by local activists and
international NGOs are overstated. In addition, we will continue
to encourage the Uzbeks to formally invite the return of an ILO
representative to Tashkent to assist the government on finding
alternatives to child labor.
NORLAND