On July 9, the House International Relations Committee held a hearing to examine the findings of the 2002-2003 State Department report on international human rights practices. The report, “Supporting Human Rights and Democracy: The U.S. Record 2002-2003,” details U.S. efforts to support human rights in 92 countries and entities with problematic and persistent human rights violations.
Rep. Christopher Smith (R-NJ), who chaired the hearing, opened the discussion with an anecdote about his 1991 trip to China, and a contentious meeting with Chinese premier Li Peng, in which Reps. Smith and Frank Wolf (R-VA) pressed the Chinese leader to end forced abortion and coerced sterilization.
“It was a remarkable and dismaying spectacle, for everything was absolutely denied, as we might expect,” Rep. Smith said. “However the exchange underscored in my mind why human rights must be central, at the core of bilateral relations. … Human rights isn’t a sideshow, or at least it shouldn’t be. It ought to be the main event.”
“We believe in the power of information, and we have been willing, when some others have not, to condemn human rights abusers,” said Assistant Secretary of State Lorne Craner of the report. “Some have called this a ‘name it and shame it strategy.’ However, the purpose of [this report] is to show that U.S. support for human rights is more than a once-a-year exercise in identifying abuses.” He offered as an example the United States’ role in post-war Afghanistan, which he said continues to recover from 23 years of conflict and political instability.
“The lack of basic infrastructure and central government authority inhibit basic human rights for minority ethnic and religious groups, for women and displaced persons. … A total of $80 million has been provided to assist women and girls in education, health care, human rights, and other programs. The U.S. government also funded the establishment of ten neighborhood-based Women’s Centers in Kabul and several nearby cities to provide vocational training to women and 14 Women’s Centers focusing on literacy and development of vocational skills for $2,575,000,” he said.
Overall, Tom Malinowski of Human Rights Watch praised the report as a “breakthrough,” but said that at times “the Department has acted as if merely describing [human rights] problems” is enough.
“Time and again, American diplomats, when asked ‘what are you doing’ about human rights violations in a particular country, have responded: ‘We put out an excellent human rights report doesn’t that prove we care?’ But of course, a human rights report is not a human rights policy. To make a difference, words must be backed by actions. And those actions must follow from a coherent strategy, consistently pursued.”
Mr. Malinowski went on to address relative silence on human rights abuses by the Chinese government. “When President Bush last met with Chinese President Hu, he did not, according to the White House, demand any specific improvements in human rights at all. Pressing uncomfortable issues at a summit is harder than cutting a check. But it is ultimately more effective in communicating American priorities.”
Mr. Malinowksi then offered several questions raised by omissions in the State Department report.
“The report mentions assistance to North Uganda, but why is there no reference to U.S. diplomatic pressure on the government to end abuses by the Uganda People’s Defense Force, including rapes of civilian women and girls, and child recruitment,” Mr. Malinowski asked. “Has the U.S. urged the government to take more effective steps to protect the civilian population in the north, particularly children who are vulnerable to recruitment?”
Assistant Secretary Craner addressed omissions within the report. “For those who wonder why a certain country was not included, we were asked to issue a report, not on all countries that are members of the U.N. … but on countries where serious problems occur regularly. Just because a country is not in this report does not necessarily mean that human rights problems do not exist in that country. It does mean that we do not see a persistent pattern of human rights violations, or a government policy promoting violations.”
Carl Gershman of the National Endowment for Democracy detailed programs sponsored by his organization that aim to improve the status of women worldwide, and in the Muslim world in particular. “Women’s programs are of central significance in many countries with large Muslim populations, since gender-related issues sit on the fault line dividing the Muslim world from the West,” he said.
George Folsom of the International Republican Institute also detailed his organization’s programs aimed at advancing the rights of women, pointing to a partnership IRI has fostered with the Asociacion Nacional Civica Femina, Mexico’s equivalent of the League of Women Voters. The partnership seeks to develop a program to monitor the performance of elected officials on key issues of importance to women.
