Shaping the new world order: The battle for human rights
By James M. Dorsey
A podcast version of this story is available on Soundcloud,
Itunes,
Spotify,
Stitcher,
TuneIn
and Tumblr.
China is leading the charge in a bid to undermine accepted
concepts of human rights accountability and justice.
The Chinese effort backed by autocrats elsewhere has turned
human rights into an underrated, yet crucial battleground in the shaping of a
new world order.
China is manoeuvring against the backdrop of an unprecedented
crackdown on Turkic Muslims in its north-western province of
Xinjiang, the accelerated
rollout of restrictions elsewhere in the country, and the export of
key elements of its model of a 21st century Orwellian surveillance
state.
The Chinese effort, highlighted in Human Rights Watch’s World
Report 2019, is multipronged.
It involves proposals to alter the principles on which
United Nations Human Rights Council operates in ways that would enable repressive,
autocratic regimes.
To achieve its goal, China is employing its financial muscle
and infrastructure and energy-driven Belt and Road initiative to economically
entice countries that are financially strapped, desperate for investment and/or
on the defensive because of human rights abuses.
China is also seeking
a dominant role in various countries’ digital infrastructure and media
that would allow it to influence the flow of information and enable its allies
to better control dissent.
China is waging its campaign at a crucial juncture of
history. It benefits from the rise of ethno- and religious nationalism,
populism, intolerance and widespread anti-migration sentiment across the
world’s democracies.
The campaign is enabled by the emergence of presidents like
Donald J. Trump in the United States, the Philippines’ Rodrigo Duterte,
Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Hungary’s Victor Orban and Brazil’s Jair
Bolsonaro who have either deemphasized human rights or gone as far as
justifying abuses in addition to seeking to limit, if not undermine,
independent media that hold them accountable.
The timing of the Chinese effort is significant because it
comes at a moment that predictions of the death of popular protest, symbolized
by the defeat of the initially successful 2011 popular Arab revolts, are being
called into question.
Mass
anti-government demonstrations in Sudan demand the resignation of
President Omar al-Bashir. Anti-Chinese
groups march in Kyrgyzstan while protests
in Zimbabwe decry repression, poor public services, high
unemployment, widespread corruption and delays in civil servants receiving
their salaries. The past year has also seen widespread anti-government
agitation in countries like Morocco
and Jordan.
The protests and what Human Rights Watch executive director
Kenneth Roth describes in his foreword to the group’s just published, 674-page World
Report 2019 as “a resistance that keeps winning battles” suggests
that China’s campaign may have won battles but has yet to win the war.
“Victory isn’t assured but the successes of the past year suggest
that the abuses of authoritarian rule are prompting a powerful human rights
counterattack,” Mr. Roth wrote.
Nonetheless, Human Rights Watch’s China director Sophie
Richardson warned that “people
outside China don’t yet seem to realize that their human rights
are…increasingly under threat as Beijing becomes more powerful… In
recent years, Beijing has…sought to extend its influence into, and impose its
standards and policies on, key international human rights
institutions—weakening some of the only means of accountability and justice
available to people around the world,”
Ms. Richardson noted that China had last year successfully
pushed a non-binding resolution in the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) that
advocated promotion of human rights on the basis of the People’s Republic’s
principle of win-win, a principle that cynics assert means China wins twice.
In a sign of the times, the resolution garnered significant
support. The United States, in a twist of irony, was the only Council member to
vote against it with countries like Germany and Australia abstaining.
China is not the only country that would like a globally
accepted approach to be altered to the detriment of human rights. Muslim
nations, with Saudi Arabia in the lead, have, for example, long sought to have
blasphemy criminalized.
The resolution “gutted the ideas of accountability for
actual human rights violations, suggesting ‘dialogue’ instead. It failed to
specify any course of action when rights violators refuse to cooperate with UN
experts, retaliate against rights defenders or actively reject human rights
principles. And it even failed to acknowledge any role for the HRC itself to
address serious human rights violations when ‘dialogue’ and ‘cooperation’ don’t
produce results,” Ms. Richardson said.
“If these ideas become not just prevailing norms but also
actual operating principles for the HRC, victims of state-sponsored abuses
worldwide—including in Myanmar, South Sudan, Syria, and Yemen—will face almost
impossible odds in holding abusive governments accountable,” Ms. Richardson
cautioned.
In a separate interview, Ms. Richardson described the
resolution as “the start of a process to wither away the UN human rights eco
system.”
She said human rights groups were concerned “about what
China will try to do next, whether it will more aggressively try to change the
council’s mandate or nibble away at language in treaties or roll back the role
of civil society. China wants inter-governmental cooperation instead of
accountability, government officials discussing among themselves with no
discussion of accountability for abuses and no participation of independent
groups.”
China’s efforts are both an attempt to rewrite international
norms and counter sharp Western criticism of its moves against Christians and
Muslim and its crackdown in Xinjiang.
Up to one million Turkic Muslims have reportedly been
incarcerated in re-education
camps that China projects as vocational training facilities. To
maintain its crackdown, China depends on a fragile
silence in the Muslim world that is fraying at the edges.
In addition to attempting to change the operating principles
of the UN Human Rights Commission, lobbying UN and foreign government officials
to tone down criticism and invited foreign
diplomats and journalists on choreographed visits to Xinjiang, China
has at times successfully employed its economic and financial clout to buy
either support or silence.
Pakistan, the host of the Belt and Road’s US$45 billion
crown jewel, has curbed
its initial criticism of the crackdown in Xinjiang.
Similarly, China is pressuring Myanmar to revive the
suspended US$3.6 billion Myitsone dam project, which if built as previously
designed would flood 600 square kilometres of forestland in northern Kachin
state and export 90 % of the power produced to China.
China
has reportedly offered in return for the dam to support Myanmar that
has been condemned by the United Nations, Western countries and some Muslim
nations for its repressive campaign against the Rohingya, some 700,000 of which
fled to Bangladesh last year.
In a bid to pacify, criticism of its Xinjiang policy in
Central Asia where anti-Chinese sentiment has been rising, China agreed this
month to allow
some 2,000 ethnic Kazakhs to renounce their Chinese citizenship and leave the
country.
The decision follows testimony in a Kazakh court of a former
employee of a re-education camp detailing
three facilities in which up to 7,500 Kazaks and Chinese nationals of Kazakh
descent allegedly were being held. The testimony prompted sharp
criticism in parliament and on social media.
China and the West’s diametrically opposed concepts of human
rights are part of a larger contest for dominance over the future of technology
and global influence.
Freedom House, a Washington-based freedom watchdog, reported
last year that China was exporting
to at least 18 countries sophisticated surveillance systems capable of
identifying threats to public order and has made it easier to repress free
speech in 36 others.
“They are passing on their norms for how technology should
govern society,” said Adrian Shahbaz, the author of the report.
Added Nadège Rolland, a senior fellow at the National Bureau
of Asian Research, a Washington think tank, speaking to Bloomberg: “There’s
a 1984 component to it that’s kind of scary.”
Dr.
James M. Dorsey is a senior fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International
Studies, co-director of the University of Würzburg’s Institute for Fan Culture,
and co-host of the New Books in Middle Eastern Studies podcast.
James is the author of The Turbulent World
of Middle East Soccer blog, a book with the same title and a co-authored
volume, Comparative Political Transitions between Southeast Asia and
the Middle East and North Africa as well as Shifting
Sands, Essays on Sports and Politics in the Middle East and North Africa
and just published China
and the Middle East: Venturing into the Maelstrom
Comments
Post a Comment