US Trade Deals: Geopolitics Over Principles
CASE A: Bangladesh's 'Advantage' The FT article positions Bangladesh's new tariff-free status as providing an 'advantage over competitors in India,' explicitly linking it to the country's status as the world's second-biggest garment producer. This framing suggests a market-driven decision to support a key supplier. The concessions cover specific clothing lines, ostensibly a reward for improving
labor standards after high-profile factory disasters such as the Rana Plaza collapse in 2013, which killed over 1,100 people (AFL-CIO, 2013). Yet, human rights organizations continue to document significant restrictions on freedom of association and collective bargaining in Bangladesh's garment sector (Human Rights Watch, 2023). CASE B: India's 'Disadvantage' Conversely, India, a democratic
partner, faces continued tariffs. While India's labor record also has significant issues, the explicit 'disadvantage' framing suggests another motivation. The US last year removed India from its Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) program, which offers duty-free access, citing concerns over trade barriers and market access for American products (Office of the United States Trade
Representative, 2019). This decision was notably distinct from the 'labor rights' lens applied to Bangladesh, focusing instead on market reciprocity. THE FRAMING: Selective Criteria The discrepancy in framing is stark. For Bangladesh, the narrative provided to the public emphasizes potential improvements in labor conditions (however tenuous) leading to a beneficial trade outcome. For India, the