An intersting Editorial in the
Washington Post of 2
June 2019 stats that the “STATE Department has published a
Federal Register notice to establish a new commission on human rights in pursuit of “fresh thinking about human rights discourse where such discourse has departed from our nation’s founding principles of natural law and natural rights.” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo
said he was trying to “
make sure that we have a solid definition of human rights upon which to tell all our diplomats around the world.” The notice, first reported by
Politico, did not say where the human rights discussion has “departed” from the nation’s founding principles. Some human rights defenders suspect that the administration intends to narrow the definitions, perhaps excluding women’s reproductive rights or LGBTQ rights.
Without knowing more it is hard to say at the moment but what is indisputable – the article continues to say – “
is that the “solid definition” Mr. Pompeo seeks already exists. It is described fully in the 43rd annual report on human rights prepared by State’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, which draws on U.S. missions around the globe to examine the state of freedom and human dignity. As Mr. Pompeo wrote in his preface to the report, the “fundamental freedoms of religion or belief, expression, peaceful assembly and association belong to every human being. These freedoms are not granted by governments but are derived from the inherent dignity of the human person.” …
President Trump and Mr. Pompeo have raised human rights abuses only sporadically, to pressure adversaries such as Iran and Venezuela, while ignoring gross violations elsewhere, a gaping inconsistency that undercuts the moral leadership of the United States. Of course, human rights are never the only concern in foreign policy and must be balanced against other factors and interests. But it does not require any more “solid definitions” to understand the horrors of Xinjiang province, where China has herded more than 1 million Turkic Uighur Muslims into brainwashing camps to eradicate their culture and language. This ethnic cleansing has come to light during the Trump administration, but its reaction has been tepid.
Do the president and the secretary need any more “solid definitions” in order to object to the methods of Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, whose hit squad was dispatched to Istanbul to kill journalist and Post contributor Jamal Khashoggi? Is the United States having trouble finding a voice to speak out against the abuse of human rights in Turkey, Egypt and Russia because of a lack of definitions — or because of a misplaced desire to butter up the authoritarians who rule them?
“Fresh thinking” is always valuable. But when it comes to human rights, time-tested institutions, principles and tools exist. They just need to be utilized.
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
This entry was posted on June 3, 2019 at 13:16 and is filed under Human Rights Defenders.
Tags: definition, editorial, Foreign Policy of the USA, international human rights law, international human rights system, Politico, Pompeo, Trump, Uyghurs, Washington Post
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 
July 11, 2019 at 19:58
[…] 2 June 2019, I referred to the idea of redefining human rights by the US State Department [https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/06/03/trumps-new-thinking-on-human-rights-in-foreign-policy/]. Now there is some ‘progress’ on this issue as reported by Human Rights in the World […]