Will Joe Biden return America to popular international politics?

We have seen pure contempt on the part of the United States for the UN human rights system.

Chronicle
This is a chronicle. Opinions in the text are the responsibility of the writer.

The United States and China are united in their opposition to the values ​​of human rights. Both great powers view compliance with UN human rights conventions as an “internal matter” outside of international scrutiny. It is pure power politics that has been open to excesses in double standards.

With Joe Biden in the White House, there is hope for an American return to popular international politics. The contrast in human rights work between Trump and Biden can be striking.

Under Trump, the United States joined the blackest reaction in defense of the UN’s universal human rights system. The United States has a somewhat spotty history in protecting human rights, especially in Latin America.

But international human rights activists, in general, have seen the United States as an ally in the fight for the civilization of politics and society that the human rights conventions signify. This was particularly the case for Presidents Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama.

American withdrawal

With Donald Trump there was a break. In keeping with his “America First” ideology, Trump believed that it was not America’s job to promote human rights in other countries. This withdrawal broke with a long tradition of activist democracy in American foreign policy.

The consequences were immediate: Trump displayed a sympathetic, even supportive attitude towards dictators or would-be dictators around the world, from Viktor Orbán in Hungary to Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil and the nascent gorilla regimes in Turkey and the Philippines. Overall, we saw a right-wing populist offensive unprecedented since WWII.

Undermine the International Criminal Court

Last year this alliance was reaffirmed. The United States has never signed the Rome Charter that establishes the ICC, the International Criminal Court. The main task of the ICC is to investigate and punish war crimes and related human rights violations. But Obama did not get in the way of the court’s work, as long as it did not affect American interests.

This changed when the ICC wanted to investigate war crimes in Afghanistan. Such an investigation would have to affect American soldiers. Then the Trump administration struck and announced sanctions against investigators in court. In other words, a state vendetta against certain investigators who carry out international court assignments.

Violation of American traditions

These days mark the 75th anniversary of the Nuremberg Tribunal, a tribunal that, especially under American pressure, was responsible for the deal with Nazi barbarism.

In this regard, there is an additional reason to point to this cynical turn in the United States’ vision of international human rights. Stripped of all paraphrases, we have seen America’s sheer disregard for the UN human rights system.

Joe Biden has announced a strengthening of America’s role as an activist in the name of democracy. It is in this field that his post-Trump restoration work will face its strongest challenges.

Selective understanding of human rights

Thus, the outgoing administration in Washington is disregarding international standards that the United States itself has held as a birthright since 1948. But that doesn’t stop the Trump people from turning to human rights arguments when it suits them.

Trump, for example, supported the democratic demonstrations in Hong Kong with such arguments, because it harmonized with his anti-China line. In the view of the oppressed Uyghur Muslim minority in China, the argument is repeated, much to China’s growing anger.

But the moment human rights considerations go against the interests of American realpolitik, values ​​give way. Opportunism triumphs over principles. As in the case of the murder of the Saudi opposition politician Jamal Khashoggi. In the event of such clashes, the outrage subsides and the interests of America’s realpolitik take its place. We are facing selective outrage and limitless double standards.

From the murderers in Riyadh came the compelling excuses that the culprits sat lower in the system. Trump nodded understandingly.

America and China are the same

The paradox so far is that China and the United States have shared views on the relationship between national interests and international criminal justice. Both states craft a cloak of raison d’état – absolute state supremacy – to protect themselves from outside sight.

The United States will not attempt by the ICC to take American soldiers to court for human rights violations. This is a kind of “America first”. And China snorts at all attempts to get the country to uphold the recognized standards of respect for minorities and freedom of expression in Hong Kong or for Uighurs. It is China first.

It is common for state abuses to be sought to hide behind a shield of “internal affairs.” Stalin thought the same when the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted in 1948.

The contradictions of annexation

Coherence in international politics cannot be expected. There is the power that counts. Not seeing it is romance.

But human rights conventions (of which China has signed more than the United States) should be understood as an absolute minimum of civilizations, regardless of the form of the regime. Therefore, hypocrisy is an additional shame in this field.

Take for example the power play around annexations. Here, this game gets more embarrassing. When Vladimir Putin annexed Crimea, he unleashed strong Western sanctions with reference to international law.

For several years, Israel has done the same: against international law and UN resolutions, the state has subjugated the Palestinian land. Israel has also recently been on the verge of directly annexing much of the West Bank.

This shamelessness has not provoked a similar reaction. In contrast, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is demonstratively traveling to the squatter settlements and occupied Golan Heights to say that the United States recognizes these conquests.

Call it

In the face of this hypocrisy and this special treatment of Israel, the international human rights milieu has few strategies other than “shaming”: Point out this selective outrage and shame practitioners.

In the case of Israel, this is more necessary. Precisely this systematic subjugation of the Palestinian land, in the eyes of many, has qualified the country to become a pure pariah state, for the past four years assisted by a narcissistic bully in the White House who has hardly thought about the Palestinian cause.

It is a sad paradox that a state created to create a home for a persecuted people has assumed the role of oppressor of another people. That internal opposition to this line has become so weak deepens the tragedy.

• Follow and participate in the discussions on Aftenposten’s views on Facebook Y Twitter.