Jackson-Vanik was a cornerstone of the US response to the Soviet Union during the Cold War. But it is time for Congress to remove this outdated policy in order to strengthen relationships with Central Asia and present a US commercial alternative to Russia and China.
The Jackson-Vanik Amendment to the Trade Act of 1974 denied US trade preferences to non-market economies that restricted emigration; it was intended to pressure the USSR and Soviet bloc countries to permit Jewish citizens and other minorities to emigrate to the West. Since 1975, more than 500,000 refugees, including large numbers of Jews, evangelical Christians, and Catholics from the former Soviet Union, have resettled in the United States. An estimated one million Soviet Jews also immigrated to Israel during this period.
We should take pride in the historic success of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment. However, its continuation today is counterproductive because it is used as a broad-spectrum human rights lever against a small number of former Soviet republics. At the breakup of the USSR, 15 new states were created. Over time, Congress exempted most of them from the Amendment’s restrictions, including Russia, Ukraine, Armenia and Georgia, along with former Soviet satellites like the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Albania.
Jackson-Vanik continues to apply to the Central Asian nations of Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Tajikistan. The primary issue Jackson-Vanik addressed – protecting Jews and allowing their emigration – is no longer relevant in these countries. For instance, Kazakhstan hosts a small but diverse and growing Jewish community; the US Commission on International Religious Freedom says there are no cases of antisemitism in Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan complies with the Trade Act’s freedom of emigration requirements. Despite these realities, legally, Kazakhstan remains in the same trade category as North Korea and Cuba, countries with no trade or investment from the US.
Kazakhstan, in particular, is a prime example of why the continued application of Jackson-Vanik is outdated. The country has met all the criteria to be repealed from the Amendment. In 2022, the Department of Commerce recognized Kazakhstan as a market economy under US trade law, acknowledging its substantive economic reforms. Furthermore, Kazakhstan became a WTO member in November 2015 and chaired the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference held in June 2022.
In addition, these nations are customers of American goods and suppliers of energy and mineral resources. Kazakhstan’s gross domestic product per capita surged from $3,700 in 1995 to $11,700 in 2023, and bilateral trade with the US is well over $4 billion per year. The US is one of the largest investors in Kazakhstan, with over 600 American companies in country and total investments exceeding $65 billion, primarily in energy. Kazakhstan accounts for a significant portion of global crude oil production; 20.4 percent of Chevron’s production in 2023 came from Kazakhstan. The country is also the largest producer of natural uranium, with 43 percent of global production. Uzbekistan also possesses substantial resources of critical minerals, including rare earth metals used in high tech products.
Moreover, the Global Magnitsky Act, which repealed the application of Jackson-Vanik to Russia and established normal trade relations with Russia and Moldova, effectively makes the Jackson-Vanik Amendment redundant. The Magnitsky Act targets individual human rights violators, rendering the broad-brush approach of Jackson-Vanik obsolete.
There has been a lack of political will to address the outdated application of Jackson-Vanik to Central Asia. It is true that some human rights activists continue to use the Amendment as leverage against these countries. But the better tool to address human rights issues, including the many new ones to emerge in the 50 years since Jackson-Vanik, is Global Magnitsky.
It is also possible the US may want to “trade” repeal of Jackson-Vanik for “something,” such as a deal in the minerals sector or a commitment to buy some kinds of military equipment from the US or its allies, instead of Russia or China. But it is unclear whether or not we received such a quid pro quo when we repealed Jackson-Vanik from Moldova, Ukraine, Romania or the Czech Republic. It might be more effective long-term just to repeal and be done with it.
These countries desire an alternative to the dominant influence of China and Russia in their security, diplomacy, and commerce. Yet, Jackson-Vanik is seen as a humiliating relic of the past, hindering the United States’ ability to build stronger relationships with these Central Asian nations. 39 congressmen on both sides of the aisle have co-sponsored a bill authorizing “Permanent Normal Trade Relations with Kazakhstan,” including 12 members of the powerful Ways and Means Committee and 12 members of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives. This legislation recognizes that Jackson-Vanik has outlived its utility and is now an impediment to modern diplomatic relations.
Perhaps Adrian Smith, Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, might lead a delegation to Central Asia to address Jackson-Vanik. Such a mission would help counter China’s Belt and Road Initiative, improve our relations in this critical region and secure US interests in critical minerals. This formerly “cost-free” vestige has now become a diplomatic headache raised in every high-level US meeting with these countries. It is time for the US to rethink its strategy, leveraging opportunities to forge stronger, mutually advantageous relationships with these emerging Central Asian nations.
Jackson-Vanik was a remarkable tool in its time, but its continued existence is now a barrier in Central Asia. These countries are integral to our future security and diplomatic strategies, and they need to see the US as a credible partner. We should remove these Central Asian countries from Jackson-Vanik or even repeal Jackson-Vanik.
