Why America’s ‘Human Rights Card’ Won’t Work: the New US-China Cold War over Hong Kong

Published in Yahoo News
(Japan) on 1 June 2020
by Shoji Mutsuji (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Kelsey Lechner. Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.

 

 

The U.S. and Europe are intensifying their criticism of China as a country not respecting human rights in the wake of the Hong Kong issue.

However, this human rights card hasn't gained the support of many countries, and has almost no effect in isolating China.

Developing countries, the majority of countries in the world, are showing signs of distrust and caution toward advanced countries' ideas of human rights and freedom.

The U.S. and China may be kicking off a new cold war with Hong Kong in the middle, but there is a high likelihood that this will be a grueling war with no winner.

How Effective Is the Human Rights Card?

On May 29, the American government announced it would repeal special treatment of Hong Kong. This is being seen as sanctions against China’s national security law that threatens Hong Kong’s high level of autonomy.

In addition, the U.S. has expressed concerns with the U.K., Canada and Australia, and is also supposedly considering canceling visas for Chinese students.

Since President Donald Trump took office in 2017, he has jumped into a trade war with China; a recent war of words over the origin of COVID-19 has also escalated. Under these circumstances, the U.S. has shuffled its “human rights deck” over the crackdown on Muslims in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, and it’s possible that the U.S. is also using the Hong Kong situation as a diplomatic tool to project an image of China as a country which threatens freedoms and human rights.

Nevertheless, during the standoff that could be considered a new cold war between the U.S. and China, there are doubts as to whether the U.S. can effectively use human rights as a shield to ward off China.

This isn’t just because economic relations with China are of vital importance to the U.S.; even if China is seen as the “enemy of freedom,” this doesn’t particularly create any big issues with the vast majority of other countries around the globe.

Developing Countries Quietly Watching

More than anything, we need to first acknowledge this: it is only advanced nations which do not hesitate to meddle in the internal affairs of other countries, and this is not limited to China's affairs. Moreover, advanced countries are overwhelmingly a minority, and do not even make up one-sixth of United Nation member states.

In stark contrast, developing nations, which form the overwhelming majority of countries in the world, generally don’t comment about the domestic affairs of other countries. There are only a few nations such as Russia that enthusiastically support China, but most developing countries don’t even try to touch on the Hong Kong issue, regardless of whether or not they are democratic.

Conjecture about China’s Economic Presence Alone Cannot Fully Explain This

For example, look at India. Although many issues still remain, India has conducted elections since its independence, and lately has clearly been at conflict with China. Nonetheless, its media rarely cover the problems in Hong Kong, and India’s government has almost never criticized China over it.

Developing nations have a strong tendency to go out of their way to avoid involvement with the domestic affairs of other countries, and this is not limited to the Hong Kong issue. In other words, noninterference takes precedence for developing nations.

Because of this, while it’s easy for other developed nations to take notice of America’s human rights card, there is little momentum among developing nations to align with it. We can’t really say that China will be in international isolation over the Hong Kong issue.

Caution with Respect to Human Rights and Freedom

There are a few reasons why countries outside of the West might take this position.

First, most developing nations have a colonial past, which the colonizers conducted under the pretext of “civilizing” them. Therefore, developing nations are extremely wary of advanced countries interfering, with their lofty ideas of human rights and freedom.

Secondly, since many developing countries have dictatorial governments and human rights issues, they especially value a policy of noninterference.

Thirdly, they are wary of the politicization of human rights and freedom.

Advanced nations tend to overlook human rights issues when they occur in connection with developing nations that they have strong ties to; this essentially creates a clear double standard. This is demonstrated by America’s usual silence over India and Saudi Arabia’s human rights issues.

Bosses don’t gain the trust of those around them if they overlook mistakes committed by subordinates they like, while harshly shouting abuse at those with whom they don’t have a good relationship.

The Difference with the Tiananmen Square Massacre

We can even see this attitude from developing countries during the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989.

In truth, while many advanced countries criticized and imposed sanctions against China, most developing nations did not even comment, and some even said thy understood China’s predicament, although some of these statements were not voiced very loudly. In this way, China was able to escape international isolation.

Furthermore, in 1989, China was not only receiving aid from advanced nations, but 80% of its trade was also dependent on them. However, China’s situation today is vastly different. China is receiving almost no aid, and trade with advanced nations has dropped to about 60%.

Put differently, China has consciously increased relations with developing countries since the Tiananmen Square massacre. This has been part of a strategy to maintain its international stature.

On another front, many developing nations are less dependent on advanced nations than they were at the time of the Tiananmen Square massacre. This can be viewed as a further factor in reducing the number of countries gathering under the human rights banners of advanced nations.

Advanced nations have a strong tendency to downplay the roles of developing nations in shaping international public opinion. However, the majority of members in international organizations like the U.N. are developing countries, which means, if advanced countries cannot get the support of developing nations, such advanced countries will be unable to preserve their power.

If this is the case, even if Trump can play the human rights card to the American public and other developed nations, this won’t isolate China, and at best, will show an actual lack of diplomatic achievement.

A War of Attrition with No Winner

On the other hand, it will be difficult for China to gather support from other countries over the Hong Kong issue.

There is increasing dissatisfaction with Chinese enterprises in developing nations as well; this tendency is strong with low-income groups. Even in Africa, which has long been China’s international foothold until now, racism against Chinese people has been surfacing due to the spread of COVID-19.

Under these conditions, it’s risky for governments in developing nations to proactively support China. That’s why it’s no wonder some countries are even demanding gratitude for putting themselves at risk for China.

That said, countries choosing to do so are limited, and most are instead decidedly waiting to see how this plays out.

In this way, the U.S. and China may both keep up the fireworks while neither is able to attract many supporters. This also means that the people of Hong Kong will get left behind.


アメリカの「人権カード」に効果がない理由――香港をめぐる米中新冷戦

 香港を挟んで米中は「新冷戦」を本格化させているといわれるが、これは勝者なき消耗戦になる公算が高い。
「人権カード」はどこまで有効か

 アメリカ政府は5月29日、香港に対する優遇措置の撤廃を発表した。中国の国家安全法によって香港の高度な自治が脅かされることへの制裁とみられる。

 この他にも、アメリカはイギリス、カナダ、オーストラリアとともに共同で懸念を示した他、中国人留学生のビザ取り消しなども検討中といわれる。

トランプ大統領は2018年の就任から中国との貿易戦争に踏み込み、最近では「コロナ発生源」をめぐる舌戦もエスカレート。こうしたなか、アメリカはこれまでにも新疆ウイグル自治区のムスリム取り締まりなどをめぐって「人権カード」を切ることがあったが、香港に関しても「人権と自由を脅かす中国」というイメージ化を外交手段にしているといえる。

ただし、米中新冷戦とも呼ばれる対立のなか、アメリカが人権を盾に中国を追い詰められるかといえば効果は疑わしい。

 それは中国との経済関係がアメリカにとっても死活的な重要性をもつからだけではない。中国が「自由の敵」であったとしても、世界の大多数の国にとって大きな問題ではないからだ。

途上国の静観
 大前提として確認しなければならないのは、中国の問題に限らず他国の内政に介入することも辞さないのは先進国だけで、しかもそれは国連加盟国の6分の1にも満たない圧倒的少数派であることだ。

 これとは対照的に、世界の圧倒的多数を占める途上国は基本的に他国の内政には口を出さない。香港に関しても、ロシアのように積極的に中国を支持する国は少ないが、民主的であってもなくてもほとんどの途上国はノータッチだ。

 それは中国の経済的プレゼンスへの忖度だけが理由ではない。

例えば、独立以来(さまざまな問題があるとしても)選挙を行い、最近では中国との対立が鮮明なインドでさえ、メディアで香港問題が取り上げられることは稀で、政府がこの問題で中国を批判することはほぼない。

 途上国には香港問題に限らず、他国の内政に関わることを極力避ける傾向が強い。つまり、途上国にとっては、いわゆる「内政不干渉」の方が優先順位として高いのである。

 そのため、アメリカの人権カードは先進国で注目されやすいが、途上国の間でそれに同調する気運はほとんど広がっておらず、香港問題で中国が国際的に孤立することは、ほぼないといえる。

人権と自由への警戒

 欧米以外の国のこうした姿勢には、いくつかの理由がある。

 第一に、ほとんどの途上国は、かつて「文明化」という大義名分のもと植民地化された歴史があるため、先進国が人権や自由といった高尚な理念を掲げて介入することへの警戒が強い。

 第二に、途上国には独裁的な政府や人権問題を抱える国も少なくないため、こうした国にとってはなおさら「内政不干渉」の優先度が高くなる。

第三に、人権や自由の政治的な利用への警戒だ。

 先進国は関係の深い途上国が相手の場合、その人権問題を無視しがちで、いわゆるダブルスタンダードが目立つ。アメリカがインドやサウジアラビアの人権問題に沈黙しがちなことは、その象徴だ。

 もともと関係のよくない部下がミスをすると悪様に罵るのに、可愛がっている部下の場合には大目にみるような上司が周囲から信頼を得ることはない。

天安門事件との違い

 こうした途上国の態度は、1989年の天安門事件でもみられたものだ。

 実際、多くの先進国が中国を批判し、制裁を行うなか、途上国のほとんどはこれにコメントさえせず、なかには決して大声でなかったものの、中国の立場に理解を示す国もあった。それによって中国は国際的な孤立を免れたのである。

 しかも、中国は1989年当時、先進国から援助を受けていただけでなく、貿易の約80%を先進国との取り引きに依存していたが、その状況は現在では大きく異なる。中国は援助をほとんど受けていないし、貿易に占める先進国の割合は約60%にまで下落している。

 つまり、天安門事件後の中国は、途上国との付き合いを意識的にそれまで以上に増やしてきたのだ。それは中国の国際的立場を保つための戦略の一環である。

一方、多くの途上国にとっても、天安門事件の頃と比べて、先進国への依存度は下がっている。これは先進国の人権の旗のもとに集う国をさらに少なくする一因といえるだろう。

 先進国では「国際世論」の形成に途上国が果たす役割を軽視する風潮が強い。しかし、国連をはじめ国際機関のメンバーの大半が途上国である以上、その支持を得られなければ、先進国とて勢力は保てない。

 だとすると、トランプ政権の人権カードはアメリカ国内や先進国でのアピールにはなっても、中国を孤立させることはできず、実際の外交的成果には乏しいといわざるを得ない。

勝者なき消耗戦

 ただし、その一方で、香港問題をめぐって中国が多くの国から支持を集めることも難しい。

 途上国でも中国企業などへの不満は高まっており、低所得層にその傾向が強い。これまでアフリカの国際的な足場だったアフリカでも、コロナ蔓延をきっかけに中国人への差別などが表面化している。

このなかで中国を積極的に支持することは、途上国の政府にとってもリスクがある。だからこそ、あえて火中の栗を拾うことで中国に恩を売る国があっても不思議ではない。

 とはいえ、そうした選択をする国は決して多くなく、ほとんどはむしろ様子見に徹している。

 こうしてみたとき、米中はどちらも多くのフォロワーを引きつけられないまま、打ち上げ花火をあげつつけることにもなりかねない。それは香港の人々が置き去りになることをも意味するのである。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Pakistan: Trump’s Gaza Blueprint Unfolds

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Japan: US President and the Federal Reserve Board: Harmonious Dialogue To Support the Dollar

Hong Kong: Cordial Cross-Strait Relations Will Spare Taiwan Trump’s Demands, Says Paul Kuoboug Chang

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Topics

Peru: Blockade ‘For Now’

Japan: US President and the Federal Reserve Board: Harmonious Dialogue To Support the Dollar

Austria: The EU Must Recognize That a Tariff Deal with Trump Is Hardly Worth Anything

Mexico: The Network of Intellectuals and Artists in Defense of Venezuela and President Nicholás Maduro

Hong Kong: Cordial Cross-Strait Relations Will Spare Taiwan Trump’s Demands, Says Paul Kuoboug Chang

Germany: The Tariffs Have Side Effects — For the US Too*

Ireland: We Must Stand Up to Trump on Climate. The Alternative Is Too Bleak To Contemplate

Canada: Carney Takes Us Backward with Americans on Trade

Related Articles

Thailand: Appeasing China Won’t Help Counter Trump

Canada: Putin Is Negotiating Victory, Not Peace

Trinidad and Tobago: US, Venezuela and the Caribbean: Diplomacy First

India: Will New US Envoy Help to Repair Ties under Threat?

France: Global South: Trump Is Playing into China’s Hands