The sermons of cowards
The west is squandering authority on democracy and human rights:
it fails to practise as it preaches
By Kishore Mahbubani
The Guardian, Friday March 28 2008
Something remarkable has happened in the struggle for greater freedom and 
democracy. The world's most powerful nation and the traditional beacon for 
democracy, the United States, has slid backwards. One of the world's poorest 
nations and the world's most populous Islamic state, Indonesia, has moved 
distinctly forward. And yet western discourse largely ignores this development, 
as evidenced by the sweeping speech on democracy delivered by the foreign 
secretary, David Miliband, last month.
The first flaw of western discourse is its inability to practise what it 
preaches in this respect: to speak truth to power. This is revealed in the 
reluctance of western governments to discuss the most catastrophic reversal in 
the field of human rights: the decision by the US government to defend the use 
of torture. In the evolution of human rights there have been two quantum leaps: 
the first was the universal abolition of slavery; the second, the move towards 
abolishing torture.
Ten years ago, if anyone had suggested the US would reintroduce torture, the 
answer would have been "impossible!" Yet the impossible has happened. Amnesty 
International has described Guantánamo as "the gulag of our times". Despite 
their history of condemning human rights violations, no western nation has 
condemned the US government for Guantánamo. Miliband's speech rightly applauded 
several brave Burmese people for standing up to the military government. They 
spoke truth to power, and at great personal risk. Sadly, even though he faced 
no personal risks, Miliband could not muster the courage to speak truth to 
power regarding Guantánamo.
Even more tellingly, in the US there has been a broader reversal on many civil 
rights issues. In the face of threats from terrorism, the population has, in 
effect, accepted a reduction of civil liberties, symbolised by the Patriot Act. 
In so doing, Americans have revealed that in a crunch they behave no 
differently to other societies. When they feel threatened, they too are 
prepared to sacrifice civil liberties - thus providing a new negative role 
model for others.
The second flaw in western discourse is the refusal to recognise its track 
record of double standards in the promotion of human rights and democracy. When 
a western country has to choose between promoting its values or defending its 
interests, interests always trump values. No western country promotes democracy 
in Saudi Arabia. Too many interests would have to be sacrificed in doing so. 
But in states such as Burma and Zimbabwe, where no major western interests are 
at risk, values can take primacy. When Tashkent agreed to host a valuable 
American military base in the battle against terrorism, the British ambassador, 
Craig Murray, was forced to resign in protest against the silence of his 
government on human rights abuses in Uzbekistan.
We are moving toward a more intelligent world. Globally, the number of highly 
educated people, especially in Asia, has never been higher. They can now make 
well-informed judgments about what the west does with human rights. Hence, 
while the west conducts a self-congratulatory conversation on the subject, the 
rest of the world sees an emperor with no moral clothing.
The third flaw in western discourse is that when presented with a choice 
between doing good and feeling good, the west almost always chooses the latter 
because it costs less. Burma exemplifies this best. History teaches that 
sanctions and exclusions have never succeeded in transforming societies. 
Engagement and dialogue over time lead to change. The tragedy of 20 years of 
isolation of Burma has done no good, even though the politicians of the west 
have felt good condemning the regime.
A prominent Burmese intellectual, Thant Myint-U, grandson of U Thant, the 
former UN secretary general, wrote in the International Herald Tribune: "What 
outside pressure can bring about democratic change? And why, after nearly two 
decades of boycotts, aid cut-offs, trade bans and diplomatic condemnation, are 
Burma's generals apparently more in charge than ever before? Are we really 
looking at Burma - a country of 55 million people - in the right way?"
The paradox here is that engaging Burmese generals will require political 
courage from western politicians. They will have to justify this to their own 
people and perhaps pay a political price as a consequence. To avoid any risk, 
western politicians heap praise (as Miliband does) on Burmese dissidents, 
lauding their courage - while simultaneously demonstrating their own moral and 
political cowardice.
The time therefore has arrived for a new discourse between the west and the 
rest on freedom and democracy. In December we will celebrate the 60th 
anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This may well provide 
an opportunity for the west to change course; nothing can or will prevent it 
lecturing the world on human rights. But it could nevertheless learn to do 
something new: to listen to the voices from the rest of the world.

· Kishore Mahbubani is the author of The New Asian Hemisphere: The Irresistible 
Shift of Global Power to the East, and will speak at the London School of 
Economics next Tuesday
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/mar/28/humanrights


      __________________________________________________________
Sent from Yahoo! Mail.
A Smarter Inbox http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

Reply via email to