The question of human rights is one of the most important at
this time in the long struggle of the peoples against medievalism,
old and new forms of colonialism and imperialism and reaction. This
question involves the recognition of the rights of all people by
dint of being human and providing these rights with constitutional
guarantees, as well as implementing those programmes and policies
which will realize them in deeds. This question also involves the
further recognition of the rights of women by virtue of their
womanhood and also turning these into tangible benefit. Finally,
there is the necessity to give constitutional guarantees to the
collective rights of all minorities or special interests and the
general interests of society itself. In other words, not only is
the question of human rights a most urgent historical question but
this is the case with other issues as well.
U.S. imperialism does not recognize the rights of people by
dint of being human. It does not recognize the rights of the
collective or the general interests of the society itself. It
recognizes no other rights but its own in order to intervene in the
internal affairs of other countries, committing aggressions against
them. It denies the nations and peoples their right to
self-determination, to decide what kind of system they want to have
for themselves. What U.S. imperialism recognizes is only the rights
of private property which appeared in the form of "civil rights" in
the struggle against feudal absolutism. This has nothing to do with
human rights. Whereever private property does not have free sway
U.S. imperialism is opposed to that country. A country which seeks
to chart its independent course necessarily restricts the power of
imperialism to operate with impunity. In other words, U.S.
imperialism trivializes the question of human rights and uses it as
an ideological weapon to advance its own political and economic
aims.
When the spokesperson of the Foreign Ministry of the People's
Republic of China declares that "The United States does not have
the right to make irresponsible remarks on the internal affairs of
China or any other country ...We are firmly opposed to such an act
of interference in other countries' internal affairs under the
pretext of human rights," we should pay utmost attention to it. The
question is not, in this instance, to determine whether the
People's Republic of China or any other country in the world are
defenders of human rights or not. The question is whether a country
has any right to interfere in the internal affairs of other
countries and commit aggressions against then or not. The question
is also whether a country or bodies like the United Nations or
agencies like the World Bank and International Monetary Fund have
the right to dictate what a country or a nation or a people should
or should not do concerning their own internal affairs. Unless such
a matter is settled, there can be no question of settling the most
important and profound problems of human rights. It is a serious
blunder on the part of those who are fooled by U.S. imperialism
that they have the right to intervene in the internal affairs of
other countries because they "defend human rights".
U.S. imperialism is not only opposed to human rights and even
theoretically does not agree with the modern definition that people
have rights by dint of being human but it is also opposed to civil
rights and political rights. The situation within the U.S. amply
illustrates that there is rampant racism and an uneven playing
field even within the system that prevails at this time. For a
country whose system is so anachronistic to run around lecturing
others how to run their countries is an expression of extreme
arrogance. U.S. imperialist chieftain Bill Clinton and others have
publicly declared that they are following a carrot and stick policy
in international affairs, based on the most reactionary medieval
notion that "Might Makes Right." How can they be for human rights
when they are not even able to provide civil rights within their
own country, let alone recognize the principle of equality between
nations, big or small.
All the human rights groups should think about these matters
extremely seriously. In so far as the PRC is concerned, it is right
to oppose this interference in the internal affairs of other
countries under the pretext of defending human rights. All human
rights groups, all political parties, all peace and justice-loving
people of the world should denounce and oppose U.S. imperialism and
all other imperialists and reactionaries who are providing
justifications for interventions, aggressions and war. At the same
time, they must fight for human rights in their own countries which
requires profound deep-going transformations in the constitutional,
legal-juridical, economic, political and cultural fields. Only
those countries and peoples who have provided constitutional
guarantees for the rights of all members of society, including
human rights, equal political rights, women's rights, etc. will
have the moral right to speak about the same internationally. If
this is not done, there is a danger that even with the best wishes
in the world, one will become a lackey and spokesperson of U.S.
imperialism and other imperialists and reactionaries. These
imperialists are relying on utter confusion about the question of
rights amongst their own people and the world's people in order to
find pretexts to continue to violate civil and political rights of
their own people and to divert them from even discussing the modern
definition of human rights. No one must become a tool of their
interventions in the internal affairs of other countries and
justify their aggressions against others. Such a situation holds
grave danger for the peoples of the world including that of a
cataclysmic inter-imperialist world war. The working class and the
broad masses of the people must be in the forefront to ensure that
this does not happen.
Shawgi Tell
University at Buffalo
Graduate School of Education
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
