Multipolarity and Human Rights

Moderator: Jan Urban

Participants: John O’Sullivan, Surin Pitsuwan, Festus Mogae, James Mancham, Trudy Stevenson, Alyaksandar Milinkevich

 

 

 

In his keynote speech, John O’Sullivan, political commentator for Radio Free Europe outlined the evolution of human rights, democracy and their relationship at present and throughout history in five “human rights revolutions”. These gradually incorporated democratic principles and internationalized human rights enforcement across national boundaries. Currently under way is the multi-polar rights revolution, which has to deal with the non-universality of an ever expanding list of Western-inspired rights. “There may be universal truths; there may be universal rights”, but these do not constitute universal values. John O’Sullivan suggested that instead of further multiplying “universal rights” and corrupting their enforcement in order to blur existing cultural differences, the focus should be on reviving democracy in the West. 

 

Surin Pitsuwan, the Secretary General of ASEAN, also subscribed to the specific cultural and historical context of human rights in diverse regions such as Asia, but at the same time called on cultural units “to dig deeper into their own foundation of faith and ideology and try to compare…the similarities [and] the differences.” If this is done, “we will find that we have a lot in common – at least our common belief in humanity, in human freedom, in human dignity.”

 

Former President of Botswana Festus Mogae also identified with the view that basic rights are universal, but added that they are independent of culture and cannot be described as “Eastern” or “Western.” He attached the biggest importance to political rights, saying that if the people were able to elect the government of their choice, and to remove it if they disagree with it, citizens would enforce human rights through the ballot box. 

 

Similarly to John O’ Sullivan’s focus on democracy, former President of the Republic of Seychelles James Mancham emphasized the need for a strong United States, which would set an example by showing that they themselves abide respect the principles of democracy and human rights. After September 11^th, 2001, U.S. leadership began to move away from those very values, which the world was taught to equate with the United States. The mindset surrounding the spread of human rights, he feels, needs to change from the previous Cold War system of “might makes right” to a that of “right makes might”. 

 

Zimbabwean opposition leader Trudy Stevenson focused on the deeper foundations of human rights, which she believes are universal and are enshrined in the basic and universal unit of society, the family. In Zimbabwe, families have become divided and dysfunctional over the years. Children are being taken out of school and their families, which provide them with the essential “moral compass”, to be exploited as child soldiers or youth militias for political purposes and taught to act with no respect for human rights. In more general terms, “the family […] is also the solution to promote and protect human rights.” 

 

According to Alyaksandar Milinkevich, Belorussian opposition leader and human rights activist, human rights in a multi-polar world are universal and mature democracies have two-fold responsibility of protecting that, which they have already achieved in terms of human rights and democracy, and of promoting those ideals elsewhere. Dialogue and cooperation should be undertaken but they have to be conditioned on democratic reforms. “Commercial pragmatism and economic relations should not stop us from insisting on fundamental values.”

 

Moderator Jan Urban pointed out that the panel was not intended to solve the problems that human rights face in this multi-polar world, but rather was an opportunity to open a dialogue that must be a never ending debate, a never ending struggle, and a never ending search for answers, adding that “silence would be the worst.”