U.S. Human Rights Diplomacy Should Stop

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 04 March 2021
by Mao Junxiang (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Liza Roberts. Edited by Michelle Bisson.
Less than two months after Joe Biden's administration took office, a key phrase has repeatedly emerged, “America is back.” People have seen that the Biden administration has partially reversed the Trump administration’s resistance to multilateral institutions, and successively announced that the United States had rejoined the Paris Agreement, the World Health Organization, and the United Nations Human Rights Council. The return of the U.S. to multilateralism is welcomed, and the international community also expects the U.S. to assume its due responsibility in responding to the global public health management crisis and global environmental issues, opposing contemporary forms of racism and tackling other issues. Of course, along with America’s return there comes American human rights diplomacy. Recently, the U.S. has repeated its old tricks, utilizing high-density tricks of human rights diplomacy. Currently in the 46th session of the U.N. Human Rights Council, the U.S. has been actively engaged inside and outside the arena. Its tactics include presenting unprovoked criticisms of what they call human rights issues in China’s Xinjiang and Hong Kong regions during the general debate of the Human Rights Council, and, at home, allowing individual Congress members to submit draft legislation to boycott the Beijing Winter Olympics.

The U.S. has always been an eager advocate and practitioner of value-based diplomacy and human rights diplomacy. After the end of the Cold War, the U.S. continued to increase its human rights diplomacy, emphasizing opposition to rapidly developing countries, especially China. Since 1990, the U.S. on 11 occasions assembled or instigated other Western countries to put forward anti-China proposals to the U.N. Human Rights Commission. The U.S. State Department publishes a “National Human Rights Report” every year, making irresponsible remarks on the human rights situation in many countries, including China. In 1993, recently inaugurated President Bill Clinton announced that China’s most-favored-nation status should be linked to human rights. After Barack Obama came to power in 2008, the U.S. human rights diplomatic offensive continued unabated to maintain and consolidate its moral high ground as a “defender of human rights.” In 2010, the U.S. National Security Strategy listed the economy, security, international order and human rights as the four core interests and issues of the U.S. In the U.S.-China Strategic Economic Dialogues that began in 2009, the U.S. has repeatedly listed human rights as one of the topics for discussion. After Donald Trump took office, brazenly launching a trade war with China and promoting the decoupling of Sino-U.S. economic and technology trade, Sino-U.S. relations took a sudden turn for the worse. The U.S. Congress has passed several bills relating to human rights in the regions of Xinjiang and Hong Kong, openly interfering in China’s internal affairs. In particular, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo repeatedly attacked China’s socialist system, the Communist Party of China, the Chinese government, and the Chinese people, and maliciously slandered China for violating religious freedoms. On the last day of his tenure, Pompeo still tried his best to attack China’s policies in Xinjiang, attempting to erect obstacles to Sino-U.S. relations after Biden came to power. Not long after Biden took power, Secretary of State Antony Blinken took over Pompeo’s rhetoric to continue unnecessarily hyping up what they call the human rights issue in Xinjiang.

Needless to say, respecting and promoting human rights has already become the mainstream call from the international community. Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms is also one of the aims and purposes stipulated by the Charter of the United Nations. China has always actively promoted the development of human rights in the world. The 1991 white paper “Human Rights in China” emphasized that China recognizes and respects the purpose and principle of the U.N. Charter to protect and promote human rights, praises and supports the efforts of the U.N. to promote human rights and fundamental freedoms in general, and actively participates in U.N. activities relating to the field of human rights. In 2018, General Secretary Xi Jinping sent a letter to a symposium commemorating the 70th anniversary of the issuance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, emphasizing that the Chinese people are willing to work with people of all countries to uphold peace, development, equality, justice, democracy, freedom and collective human value, as well as safeguarding human rights and dignity. Xi also spoke in favor of promoting the formation of a more just, reasonable, and inclusive human rights governance, jointly building a community of people with a shared future, and creating a better future for the world.

In contrast, U.S. human rights diplomacy seems to have reached a dead end. Certainly, including human rights concerns in a country’s foreign policy can enhance the moral appeal of it. However, if human rights diplomacy is used as a tool to realize national interests, then human rights are politicized, double standards are adopted on human rights issues, and political confrontations are frequent, then the morality of human rights diplomacy will be entirely degraded. It is obvious that while the U.S. on the one hand calls for human rights and humanitarianism, on the other hand it has repeatedly incited conflicts in places such as Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, and other countries. While accusing other countries of violating human rights, the U.S. created incidents of torture in Guantanamo Bay that shocked the world. While accusing other countries of suppressing democratic movements, the U.S. suppressed demonstrations against racism within its own country. It is no wonder that U.S. human rights diplomacy has been shamefully labeled “World Famous Double Standards” as more and more people clearly see the hypocritical nature of this diplomacy. In fact, U.S. human rights diplomacy has repeatedly run into walls and is widely unpopular. In 1994, under dual pressures at home and abroad, Clinton announced the abolition of the practice of linking human rights with most-favored-nation status for China. As of 2004, the 11 anti-China human rights bills put forward by the U.S. and other Western nations in the U.N. Human Rights Commission have all ended in failure. In 2018, the U.S. failed to woo European Union countries to reform the Human Rights Council and even withdrew, which sent the international public into a frenzy. In 2020, the U.S. failed to combat the pandemic and turned away from China and the World Health Organization, in the end announcing its withdrawal from the organization. In fact, facing wave after wave of U.S. human rights diplomatic attacks, the Chinese people have become increasingly calm, getting somewhat used to this pattern.

There is an old Chinese saying that goes: “Turn inward to examine yourself when encountering difficulties.” The U.S. government should reflect on why human rights diplomacy is so unpopular. U.S. human rights diplomacy is unpopular, and apart from mixing with politics and business it is mainly driven by self-righteousness. Those in power in the U.S. may seek to closely examine the domestic situation fraught with human rights concerns: institutional racism, the proliferation of guns leading to mass casualties, the growing gap between rich and poor ... in fact, they don’t all need to be listed. President Biden contributed a few ideas during his inaugural address: “a rise in political extremism, white supremacy, domestic terrorism,” “growing inequity” and “extremism, lawlessness, violence. Disease, joblessness, hopelessness.” The number of deaths from the coronavirus pandemic in the U.S. has already surpassed the total number of casualties in the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Afghanistan War, and the Iraq War combined. Even President Biden was pained to report that the coronavirus pandemic has taken more lives in a year than in all of World War II. The chronic domestic governance problems in the U.S. are hard to address, and they will certainly not be solved in a day. The Biden administration has a long way to go in promoting and protecting human rights in the U.S. In this regard, people with insight into the West say: For many years, the U.S. has been telling other countries to learn from the U.S., but now it is best for the U.S. to learn from other countries.

Facing a declining trend of human rights diplomacy, what should the U.S. government do? Here, we are willing to share a few ancient poems. First, “by a boat, half-sunken, a thousand others are sailing; Myriad woods in spring are growing beyond this ailing tree.” The world today is facing major changes not seen in a century, and building a community with a shared future for mankind is the right way to move forward. There is no need for the new U.S. government to cling to Cold War thinking, longing for the old style of human rights diplomacy. Second, “the mountains cannot block it, in the end the river flows East.” During the Trump administration, Sino-U.S. relations reached an all-time low, not in line with either country’s strategic interests or the well-being of their people, nor in line with the general expectations of the international community. The United States’ unscrupulous efforts to suppress and contain China ultimately cannot stop China’s steady progress. On the contrary, the prospects for a great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation have become increasingly clear.

China-U.S. relations are the most important bilateral relations in the world. President Xi said: “A good relationship between China and the U.S. is not only beneficial to the two countries and the two peoples, but also to the world. We have a thousand reasons to improve Sino-U.S. relations, and no reason to ruin relations.” Looking back, Sino-U.S. relations have changed thousands of times, giving people a deep understanding that issues from the past are lighter now and these ups and downs are just the way of the world. Looking forward, Sino-U.S. relations should continue improving, moving toward a new world. One of the noticeable key words in Biden’s inauguration speech was “unity.” The international community is of course happy to see unity within the U.S. but it hopes even more to see greater unity across the world. For the current plan, China and the U.S. should join hands to promote the formation of a fair, reasonable and inclusive global human rights governance system through international cooperation, and work to build a community with a shared future for mankind.


拜登政府上台执政不到两个月,一个关键词屡屡出现,那就是“美国回来了”。人们发现,拜登政府部分逆转了特朗普政府对多边体制的抵制态度,先后宣布重返《巴黎协议》、重新加入世界卫生组织、重返联合国人权理事会。我们对美国重返多边主义表示欢迎,国际社会也期待美国能够在应对全球公共卫生治理危机和全球环境问题、反对当代形式种族主义等问题上表现出应有的担当。当然,伴随着“美国回来了”的还有美式人权外交。近期,美国故伎重演,高密度玩弄“人权外交”把戏。当前正处于联合国人权理事会第46届会议会期,美国“戏里戏外”表现积极,或者在人权理事会一般性辩论中无端指责中国新疆和香港地区所谓的人权问题,或者在国内由个别国会议员提交抵制北京冬奥会的立法草案。

美国一直都是价值观外交或人权外交积极的鼓吹者和实践者。冷战结束后,美国人权外交持续加码,重点针对广大发展中国家,特别是中国。从1990年开始,美国先后11次纠集或唆使其他西方国家在联合国人权委员会提出反华人权议案。美国国务院每年发布“国别人权报告”,对包括中国在内的许多国家的人权状况说三道四。1993年,刚刚担任美国总统的克林顿,宣布将人权与对华最惠国待遇挂钩。2008年奥巴马执政后,美国人权外交攻势不减,以维护并巩固其“人权卫士”的道德制高点。2010年,美国国家安全战略报告将经济、安全、国际秩序、人权列为美国四大核心利益和四大核心议题。在2009年开始的中美战略与经济对话中,美国多次将人权问题列为讨论议题之一。特朗普执政后,悍然发动对华贸易战并推动中美经贸和科技脱钩,中美关系形势急转直下。美国国会先后通过了涉疆涉港人权法案,赤裸裸干预中国内政。特别是,前国务卿蓬佩奥多次恶毒攻击中国社会主义制度、中国共产党、中国政府和中国人民,恶意诽谤中国“侵犯宗教自由”。在其任期最后一天,蓬佩奥仍极尽所能地攻击中国在新疆的治理政策,企图为拜登执政后的中美关系“埋坑设障”。拜登执政后不久,国务卿布林肯即接过蓬佩奥的话术,无端炒作所谓的新疆人权问题。

毋庸讳言,在国际关系中尊重和促进人权,已经成为国际社会的主流呼声。尊重人权和基本自由,也是《联合国宪章》规定的目的和宗旨之一。中国一贯积极推动世界人权事业发展。1991年《中国的人权状况》白皮书强调:中国承认和尊重联合国宪章保护和促进人权的宗旨与原则,赞赏和支持联合国普遍促进人权和基本自由的努力,并积极参与联合国人权领域的活动。2018年,习近平总书记致信纪念《世界人权宣言》发表70周年座谈会,强调“中国人民愿同各国人民一道,秉持和平、发展、公平、正义、民主、自由的人类共同价值,维护人的尊严和权利,推动形成更加公正、合理、包容的全球人权治理,共同构建人类命运共同体,开创世界美好未来”。

反观美国人权外交,似乎走进了死胡同。固然,一国在外交政策中纳入对人权的关注,可以提升该国外交政策的道德感召力。但是,如果将人权外交作为实现国家利益的工具和手段,将人权政治化,在人权问题上大搞双重标准,动辄政治对抗,那么人权外交就彻底道德沦丧了。君不见,美国一边高喊着人权和人道主义,一边却在科索沃、阿富汗和伊拉克等地频频发动战争;美国一边指责他国侵犯人权,一边却在关塔那摩军事基地制造震惊世界的“虐囚”事件;美国一边指责他国“镇压民主运动”,一边却在国内镇压抗议种族主义的游行示威活动。无怪乎,美国人权外交被贴上“世界驰名双标”的可耻标签,越来越多的人已经看清了美国人权外交的虚伪本质。实际上,美国人权外交也屡屡碰壁、不得人心。1994年,在国内外双重压力之下,克林顿宣布取消将人权与对华最惠国待遇挂钩的做法。截至2004年,美国和其他西方国家在联合国人权委员会11次提出的反华人权议案皆以失败而告终。2018年,美国拉拢欧盟国家“改造”人权理事会不成,竟然一退了之,国际舆论一片哗然。2020年,美国国内抗疫不力,竟然甩锅中国和世界卫生组织,最终宣布退出该组织。其实,面对美国一波又一波的对华人权外交攻势,中国人民倒是越来越淡定了,多少有点“惯看秋月春风”的味道。

中国有句古语,叫“行有不得,反求诸己”。美国政府应该好好反思一下,为什么人权外交不得人心。美国人权外交不得人心,除了夹杂着政治勾当之外,主要还是“己身不正”。美国当政者不妨审视一下问题丛生的国内人权状况:结构性的种族主义、枪支泛滥造成大量人员伤亡、贫富差距显著拉大……其实,不用我们一一列举,拜登总统在就职演说中就给我们补充了一些:“政治极端主义、白人至上、国内恐怖主义兴起”“尖锐的不平等”“极端主义、违法、暴力、疾病、失业和绝望”。美国在新冠肺炎疫情中的死亡人数已经超过了其在越南战争、海湾战争、阿富汗战争和伊拉克战争中伤亡人数的总和,连拜登总统都痛陈新冠肺炎疫情“在一年中夺走的生命比整个二战还要多”。美国国内的治理痼疾积重难返,解决起来绝非一日之功,预示着拜登政府在国内增进和保障人权方面任重道远。对此,西方有识之士呼吁:“多年来,美国一直在告诉他国要向美国学习,但如今美国最好向其他国家学习。”

面对人权外交的日渐颓势,美国政府该何去何从呢?在这里,我们愿意分享几句古诗词。一是“沉舟侧畔千帆过,病树前头万木春”。当今世界正面临百年未有之大变局,构建人类命运共同体才是人间正道,昭示着人类发展未来方向。美国新政府没有必要再死守冷战思维、留恋人权外交的旧把式了。二是“青山遮不住,毕竟东流去”。特朗普执政时期,中美关系跌入低谷,既不符合两国的战略利益与两国人民的福祉,也不符合国际社会的普遍期待。美国不择手段地打压和遏制中国,并不能阻挡中国不断前进的坚定步伐。相反,中华民族伟大复兴的前景越来越明朗。

中美关系是世界上最重要的双边关系。习近平主席说:“中美两国关系好,不仅对两国和两国人民有利,对世界也有利。我们有一千条理由把中美关系搞好,没有一条理由把中美关系搞坏。”回望过去,中美关系百转千回,让人深刻体会到“古今多少事,都付笑谈中”的世道沧桑;展望未来,中美关系应该“直挂云帆济沧海”,走出一片新天地。我们注意到,拜登总统就职演说中的关键词之一就是“团结”。国际社会当然乐意看到美国国内的团结;但是,国际社会更希望看到整个世界的大团结。为今之计,应该是中美两国携手起来,通过国际合作推动形成公正合理包容的全球人权治理,构建人类命运共同体。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Russia: Political Analyst Reveals the Real Reason behind US Tariffs*

Afghanistan: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Topics

Afghanistan: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Russia: Political Analyst Reveals the Real Reason behind US Tariffs*

Poland: Meloni in the White House. Has Trump Forgotten Poland?*

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Japan: US Administration Losing Credibility 3 Months into Policy of Threats

Mauritius: Could Trump Be Leading the World into Recession?

Related Articles

Afghanistan: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Hong Kong: Can US Tariffs Targeting Hong Kong’s ‘Very Survival’ Really Choke the Life out of It?

Cuba: Trump, Panama and the Canal