There’s a very interesting opinion article in the International Herald Tribune about Hillary Clinton and her recent trip to China.
Hillary Clinton in China
On Wednesday, the State Department released a report criticizing China for its human rights record. However, in one of her first important diplomatic moves as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton showed little support for human rights and seemed to directly contradict the findings of the State Department report, and more generally the U.S. position regarding China & human rights.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may have set back the cause of human rights in China when she said on her Asia tour that while the United States will continue to press China on issues such as Tibet, Taiwan and human rights, “our pressing on those issues can’t interfere with the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crisis.”
Clinton’s position has two potentially detrimental effects. It undermines the long-fought campaign for a comprehensive foreign policy, one recognizing the interdependence of human rights concerns with traditional strategic goals. And it ultimately fails civil society groups in China and those suffering human rights abuses. — Sonia Cardenas
I’m shocked that Clinton chose to prioritize economic issues over human rights — not that those issues aren’t important, but simply because she’s denying that human rights is important. By choosing to separate human rights from all these other issues, Clinton also fails to understand that all these problems are interrelated. How can you progress on climate change or security when human rights at home are being violated? In the end, all these issues have to be addressed. And human rights definitely has to be one of the top priorities. For the first time, I’m incredibly disappointed in Hillary Clinton, and I hope that this doesn’t signal future blatant disregard of human rights by the Obama administration.
She went out of her way to downgrade human rights, placing economic, environmental and security relations above the abuse of countless individuals under Chinese rule - members of minority and religious groups who are systematically repressed, detainees and prisoners who are tortured, human rights and civil society activists arbitrarily detained, women and children routinely subjected to violence and discrimination and tens of thousands without recourse to an effective justice system, as well as widespread censorship. — Sonia Cardenas
And some argue that before the U.S. can criticize other countries for its human rights abuses, the U.S. has to ensure that it is respecting human rights itself. Of course, this is true, and I’ve always strongly believed that by closing Guantanamo, the U.S. will demonstrate its commitment to human rights and can become a more effective advocate of human rights around the world. But, when people attempt to use this argument as a way to effectively exempt other countries from criticism for their human rights abuses - by saying “Oh, since the U.S. is being hypocritical, they have no right to speak out against other countries’ human rights violations” - that’s what I think is wrong. Regardless of what the U.S. is doing at home, America has such great power abroad that it cannot simply ignore. The U.S. has to continue exercising this power for good, by continuing to pressure other countries - including China - to end human rights violations. American hypocrisy may end soon - or it may never end; America has never had a perfect human rights record. Does that mean that the U.S. shouldn’t work to end human rights abuses in the meantime? No. Ending human rights violations simply has to start now, rather than being postponed “sometime” into the future.
If you liked this post, please comment and subscribe for free to receive updates!
Related posts:
Recent Comments