The EU’s Approach to Trade and Human Rights in Southeast Asia: A Comparative Study on the EU’s Policy on Myanmar and Cambodia

By: Taufiq E Faruque

Abstract:Ìý

The European Union (EU) is a global trading power thanks to the size of its internal market. TheÌý
norms and ideals, like fundamental freedom and the rule of law, are always tagged with the EU’sÌý
external trade policy. However, the EU’s normative trade policy often appears inconsistent andÌý
exhibits an asymmetric response on normative grounds, such as breaches of human rights andÌý
democratic backsliding in trading partner countries. This thesis aims to analyze the drivers behindÌý
the EU’s diverging trade measures in the context of two Least Developed Countries (LDCs) inÌý
Southeast Asia: Myanmar and Cambodia. Both Myanmar and Cambodia are recipients of the EU’sÌý
unilateral trade preference for the LDCs – the Everything But Arms (EBA), which allows theÌý
recipients to get quota-free and duty-free access to the EU market for all goods except weapons.Ìý
The goal of this scheme is to promote market liberalization and economic development in theÌý
LDCs, provided that they ensure fundamental human rights and labor standards. The 2017Ìý
Rohingya genocide, the 2021 military coup in Myanmar, and the increasing democraticÌý
backsliding in Cambodia since 2017 present severe cases of human rights violations and politicalÌý
persecution. In response, we saw the EU’s asymmetrical policy response, which invoked humanÌý
rights grounds and partially suspended Cambodia’s EBA preference. On the contrary, the EBAÌý
scheme for Myanmar continued, despite the scale and nature of human rights violations being moreÌý
serious in Myanmar than in Cambodia. This research aims to explain the apparent policyÌý
divergence of the EU on trade and human rights grounds, utilizing these two similar cases withÌý
dissimilar outcomes. In doing so, this research employs role theory as an overarching frameworkÌý
and utilizes comparative process tracing as its method. The empirical analysis is based on threeÌý
assumptions: (1) strategic calculations and institutional learning; (2) the Do No Harm Principle;Ìý
and (3) lobbying and political context of the target country. The key findings confirmed theÌý
assumptions and thus the thesis argues that the EU’s role as a normative trade actor was shaped byÌý
a dynamic interplay of strategic, institutional, ethical, and lobbying factors. Myanmar’s highÌý
strategic value, humanitarian concern, and the nature of lobbying pushed the EU to continue theÌý
country’s EBA. On the contrary, Cambodia’s drift towards China, humanitarian considerations,Ìý
and the opposition's strategic lobbying for EBA suspension at the EU institutions prompted the EUÌý
to suspend the country’s EBA scheme partially.Ìý

Ìý