Addressing Gaston, Clinton Pushes Renewed Priorities for Human Rights
In 21st Century, U.S. Must 'Finish the Job'
The United States cannot successfully pursue an international lasting peace unless it practically promotes human rights, argued Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton today in Gaston Hall, in a speech that deviated from the Obama administration’s relative silence on issues of human rights.
Timed with the week of the 61-year anniversary of the signing of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, Clinton’s address, titled “The Human Rights Agenda for the 21st Century,” outlined the United States’ commitment to making “human rights a human reality.” Throughout the talk, she gave special attention to the cases of China and Russia and referenced various other human rights abuses in Africa, yet did not discuss Saudi Arabia, a valuable ally that the United States has been hesitant to condemn for human rights violations.
Clinton’s impassioned tone and speech occurred in the face of criticisms that the Obama administration has shied away from addressing global human rights, although she did not make reference to these claims. “The potential to join freely with society so that every person can find fulfillment and self-sufficiency … is sacred,” Clinton said. “That, however, is a dangerous belief to many who hold power and construct their position against another.”
Human rights, democracy and development are three intertwined goals that the United States must advocate together, she continued. Democracy, she said, is the best political system for making human rights a reality in the long run, in that it necessitates accountable institutions and freedoms of choice, expression and press. Sustainable human development allows citizens of democracies to live up to their potentials. “To make a real and long-term difference in people’s lives, we have to tackle all three simultaneously with a commitment that is smart, strategic, determined and long-term,” she said.
Clinton admitted that this commitment could not be implemented universally, however, and that the United States today faces regimes that are unable but willing, able but unwilling and unable and unwilling to promote democratic institutions, citing African states, Cuba and the eastern Congo as examples.
The bulk of Clinton’s speech was a review of four elements of the Obama administration’s approach to human rights, starting with holding everyone, including the United States, accountable to universal standards. President Obama, she said, did this by prohibiting the use of torture in an executive order issued on his second day in office, and next year, the United States will include itself for the first time in its annual report on human trafficking. Holding governments accountable for their actions will not take one form, but rather will include publicly denouncing certain actions, such as the violence in Guinea, as well as engaging in administrative-level diplomatic talks, Clinton said.
Clinton emphasized that the United States must encourage that human rights be put into law and institutionalized. “In every instance, our aim will be to make a difference, not to prove a point,” she said. “Often the toughest test for governments … is absorbing and accepting criticism. And here, too, we should lead by example.”
The second element, that the United States must be “pragmatic and agile” in its approach to human rights, reflected these points. A balance of isolation and engagement, Clinton said, has helped the United States address security issues in North Korea and Iran and violence in Myanmar.
Clinton continued by noting that the U.S. must also act through multilateral institutions, in addition to bilateral relations, referring to its renewed membership of the U.N. Human Rights Council this year. In its first session, the United States co-sponsored a successful resolution promoting freedom of expression, including religious toleration. The secretary did not elaborate on a cohesive policy for achieving international religious freedom, however; the subject is highly relevant in the Middle East but has been marginalized, as the Obama administration has yet to name an ambassador-at-large for religious freedom.
Here, Clinton spoke more in depth about China and Russia, saying that the United States must open candid discussions with them to maintain positive bilateral relationships. The United States calls for rights of minorities in Tibet and Xinjiang and freedom of expression, she said, a statement that comes after national criticisms that Obama did not press human rights issues strongly enough in his recent summit with Chinese President Hu Jintao in Beijing. In Russia, Clinton said, the United States must act to condemn the murders and mistreatment of democracy activists and journalists.
Thirdly, Clinton emphasized the necessity of a bottom-up approach — one that engages civil society — in actualizing international human rights. “The project of making human rights a human reality cannot be just one for governments," she said. “Six weeks ago in Morocco, I met with civil society activists from across the Middle East and North Africa. They exemplify how lasting change comes from within.”
Enlisting religious groups and labor unions and pressing for a heightened presence of non-governmental organizations in multilateral institutions like the United Nations can help the United States avoid imposing change externally and allow it to defend it from the inside, Clinton said.
It is important to share information and access human rights defenders through the Internet and technological means of communication, the use of which, Clinton said, she has expanded in the State Department. (Cognizant of her own technological shortcomings, she later joked in response to a question that she doesn’t “know Twitter or tweeter, to be honest.”)
Such an approach to human rights requires targeted assistance and economic development to set a path for long-term growth, she continued. “We will pursue a rights-respecting approach to development — consulting with local communities, ensuring transparency, midwifing accountable institutions — so our development activities act in concert with our efforts to support democratic governance. That is the pressing challenge we face in Afghanistan and Pakistan today,” she said.
The fourth and final element is an attempt to widen the scope of countries that need U.S. aid. The United States, Clinton said, must continue its support of institutions in countries where democratic change has occurred instead of becoming complacent with apparent progress. “Positive change must be reinforced and strengthened where hope is on the rise, and we will not ignore or overlook places of seemingly intractable tragedy and despair,” Clinton said.
Clinton addressed more specifically discrimination against homosexuality in the Middle East, Africa and Asia, as well as genocide in Sudan. She also touched upon women’s rights, a cause that she has specially promoted in the past. “As I said in Beijing in 1995, human rights are women’s rights and women’s rights are human rights,” she said. “But, oh, I wish it could be so easily translated into action and changes. That ideal is far from being realized in so many places around our world.”
While acknowledging that American actions have had unintended consequences in the past, leading at times to greater human rights violations, the United States has since learned from its mistakes, the secretary said, adding that it cannot believe that progress in some places is impossible.
These four aspects of the U.S. approach, Clinton concluded, “will help build a foundation that enables people to stand and rise above poverty, hunger and disease, and that secures their rights under democratic governance. We must lift the ceiling of oppression, corruption and violence, and we must light a fire of human potential through access to education and economic opportunity.”
Clinton also called upon the Georgetown community, which she praised for its commitment to human rights through its Catholic identity, asking the student body for its ideas, criticism and analysis of how the U.S. human rights approach can be expanded.
“When a person has food and education but not the freedom to discuss and debate with fellow citizens, he is denied the life he deserves,” she said. “It is work that we know we don’t have all the answers for, but it is the work that America signed up to do. And we will continue day by day, inch by inch, to try to make whatever progress is humanly possible.”









![“The rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness … [are] the prerequisite for building a world in which every person has the opportunity to live up to his or her God-given potential and the power behind every movement for freedom,” Clinton said Monday.](/static/images/derivatives/preview_IMG_1250_.jpg)




Dec 14 2009 at 9:01 p.m.
This is typical imperial double-talk by an establishment liberal. For people like Clinton, "human rights" is not much more than a pawn in the chess game of great power relations, evidenced readily by the fact that she did not discuss Saudi Arabia's atrocious record. Taking human rights seriously means seeing Clinton's speech for what it is: empty rhetoric. While certainly we can desire that such rhetoric be fulfilled, it is almost certain that the Obama administration will do very little to achieve those ends. While she mentioned civil society, it's not particularly clear that she cares much for it when it takes an oppositional stance here at home, whether in protests against the party conventions, trade talks, foreign policy, or much else, as she has stayed (like most establishment liberals) conspicuously silent on police repression of protest activities in this country. While it's important for Hoyas to interact with people in positions of power, I grow weary of my fellow students looking to such people with starry-eyed wonder rather than with the contemptuous glare that they deserve.
Dec 14 2009 at 10:46 p.m.
LeftistHoya,
I'm looking at you with a contemptuous glare. Come down from that high horse and join the rest of us in the real world. Thanks.
Dec 15 2009 at 12:25 a.m.
@Tim: Aside from a general dislike of my political sentiment and a claim that I'm not in the "real world," do you want to present any evidence that contradicts my claims?
Dec 15 2009 at 7:41 p.m.
LeftistHoya:
I couldn't have said it better myself. The only thing we've done is migrated from garbled rhetoric of the last administration to soaring (make that empty, hot air) rhetoric in the current one, of which Hillary is a leading proponent. Some things just don't change.
Dec 15 2009 at 9:56 p.m.
When you explain to me how global human rights can be achieved given the political, economic, and social realities in other countries, I'd like to hear it. Should we be going to war with every inhumane country in the world? Should we be sacrificing even more of our fragile economy in order to impose sanctions on countries that just don't believe in the same rights that we do?
Speaking of empty rhetoric, explain to me how exactly you would achieve your goals in an even remotely feasible way, and I'll respond to those points.
Dec 16 2009 at 1:34 a.m.
I believe Secretary Clinton also mentioned how information technology sustained the protests by Iranian students and young people over the last 6 months and their fight for human rights. Is there anything GU students could do to support their Iranian fellow students in their fight for freedom: e.g. meetings, seminars, petitions, advice on internet and computer use, etc? Has the student Iranian Cultural Association on campus done anything?