THE LEGACY AND THE FUTURE
USIA
14 October 1998
HUMAN RIGHTS: THE LEGACY AND THE FUTURE
(An interview with John Shattuck) (1530)
(The following interview appears in the U.S. Information Agency's
Electronic Journal titled: "Free and Equal: The Universal Declaration
of Human Rights at 50," posted on the overseas home page October 14.
It can be viewed at
www.usia.gov/journals/itdhr/1098/ijde/ijde1098.htm. John Shattuck is
the outgoing assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights
and labor. He has been nominated to be the next U.S. ambassador to the
Czech Republic. This interview was conducted at his office on
September 28, 1998, by USIA Consulting Editor Rick Marshall.)
Question: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights will be 50 years
old in December. Many organizations are preparing to commemorate the
event. How would you view this past half century in terms of human
rights?
Shattuck: I think the period of the last half century has been a huge
paradox in many respects. It's been the time when the groundwork for
an international rule of law has been laid. The Universal Declaration
of Human Rights and the United Nations were the collective global
effort to say "never again" to the kind of abuses witnessed during
World War II and the Holocaust. They have given voice to millions of
people around the world who would otherwise have their efforts to
achieve freedom and to establish basic human rights dissipated because
no one would pay attention.
On the other hand, over this past half century we have seen continuing
crises of basic and fundamental liberties. During the Cold War, for
example, Stalinist forces moved in to crush the aspirations for
liberty in Eastern Europe -- of course, they had already done so in
the Soviet Union. Many of the same phenomena occurred in parts of
Asia, particularly in China.
At the same time, our own country struggled with the terrible legacy
of slavery and the legacy of having done much to destroy basic
indigenous cultures of Native Americans. These were the other side of
the paradox.
Now in the United States, what we've seen during this period is a
tremendous, powerful domestic movement to put behind us -- or at least
to develop remedies for -- the terrible abuses of civil rights and
civil liberties that occurred in slavery and in the period after that.
And we've also seen some progress in recognition of the importance of
indigenous rights, and great progress on giving voice and rights to
other disenfranchised groups -- particularly women -- but also other
groups and national minorities in this great American melting pot.
But we have a long way to go and are continuing on that road.
In many ways, the symbol of human rights progress, above all in this
period, was the development of a multiracial democracy in South Africa
out of the ruins and devastation of apartheid. So there are victories
that have been achieved during this period, though there have been
many continuing and horrendous abuses.
Most recently, of course, we've seen the emergence of terrible
conflicts that have led to genocide such as in Rwanda and the former
Yugoslavia. These are a constant reminder that no matter how good
rights may be on paper, cynical leaders can stimulate conflict and
destroy whole countries and huge civilian populations through their
manipulations.
Q: What kind of role has the human rights movement played in the
history of this half century?
Shattuck: The human rights movement has achieved greater and greater
legitimacy over these 50 years. It's a movement that reflects the
growing positive forces of globalization and the desire of all human
beings to lead their own lives in freedom and relative peace. So when
the world comes together and adopts a document like the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights and then projects it over these five
decades, that's a very powerful legitimizing force. I think it did
have a role in the Helsinki Process in the former Soviet Union and
Eastern Europe.
I think it's having a role today among those struggling for human
rights in China, Indonesia, Burma and Nigeria, places where very
strong authoritarian regimes have succeeded in suppressing human
rights. In the end, the pressures are great to change those systems. I
think the human rights aspirations and the legitimacy given by the
Universal Declaration have an impact. There is a relationship between
what actually happens in a country and what the international
community recognizes as legitimate.
A major event that occurred at the beginning of this administration
was the World Conference on Human Rights, the Vienna Conference. There
for the first time the countries of the world actually went beyond the
words of the Universal Declaration and adopted a position that human
rights are a legitimate subject for international diplomacy and
discussion. That was very important. You even had countries like China
reluctantly sign on to that, along with many other countries that were
taking a position that internal matters could not be looked at from a
human rights standpoint.
I also think that what we've seen in the last five years for the first
time are international coalitions coming together exclusively to
address human rights crises. That was the case in Haiti, and it was
the case, very belatedly, in Bosnia. Normally, international
coalitions, particularly those that have a military component, come
together for reasons of national self-interest. In this case, with the
United Nations behind them and for almost no other reason than the
terrible human rights abuses, they were put together.
The biggest disappointment I've had in these years is that the
terrible crisis in Rwanda did not achieve the kind of international
consensus for direct action in time to save the estimated 500,000 or
more who were killed in the Rwanda genocide. But I think the
precedents have been set with Haiti, with Bosnia. I think with the
growing international resolve around Kosovo, that there can be
practical steps taken by the international community to deal with the
worst human rights abuses.
This has got a very long way to go before it becomes a truly effective
international system with an enforcement process, however.
Q: Where you do think human rights will be in another 50 years?
Shattuck: I think there are many trends here which are competing. If
the good can overcome the bad, then this system of international
protection of human rights can be significantly advanced. But that
will mean much greater acceptance of the principle that internal
developments inside a country that severely impact on the human rights
of citizens are a matter of legitimate international concern. Right
now that proposition is not as widely accepted as it should be.
It will mean that the trend toward increasing ethnic and religious
conflict will have to be checked by international systems for
preventing those conflicts in advance -- by a combination of
diplomatic and sometimes military means as well as by developing civil
societies. So far, we have not put together a very effective
preventive system for stopping these religious and ethnic conflicts
before they really get out of hand.
I think the global economic system will have to be accompanied by
growing respect for basic international labor rights, worker rights
and protection of vulnerable populations from being exploited --
women, child labor. The United States has taken the lead in trying to
make sure that those protections come into being, but there are a lot
of countries resisting that.
I also think that our own country will have to continue to take steps
to recognize the international system that is so important for the
protection of human rights, such as ratifying the various treaties.
The United States has been very actively involved in drafting them,
and we were there at the creation of the Universal Declaration. It is
now incumbent upon us to step up to the plate and fully endorse the
international human rights legal system.
We will have to develop better international systems of justice, too.
We've made a start by, for the first time, developing war crimes
tribunals for cases of genocide and crimes against humanity in the
former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. But we need to take steps now to develop
an effective international justice system along the lines that have
been debated over recent years around the International Criminal
Court. There was a lot of disagreement about details, but in the end,
we need a system that can get at the terrible abusers that exist in
many other countries outside of Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.
These are all the kinds of things that are on the agenda for the next
50 years. And it will take that long to really work on them. They're
all things that won't happen overnight. I would hope that by the 100th
anniversary celebration some or maybe even all of these systems will
have developed much further than they are today.
(Note to Posts: The complete USIA Electronic Journal commemorating the
50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is
available on the USIA Home Page. Posts which would like a special
print version should see USIA Cable 17812.)