Trump’s Boycott of the UN’s Human Rights Process Puts America Last, Not First

Catherine Powell, Beth Van Schaack, and Desirée Cormier Smith

Source Link

Catherine Powell, an adjunct senior fellow for women and foreign policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, is the former White House National Security Council human rights director. Desirée Cormier Smith is the former U.S. special representative for racial equity and justice. Beth Van Schaack is the former ambassador-at-large for global criminal justice.

In August, President Donald Trump’s administration abruptly withdrew from the United Nations’ signature human rights process: the Universal Periodic Review (UPR). While this move didn’t make headlines in domestic media, it should have. The UPR offers an opportunity for all countries to take stock of their voluntary efforts to promote human rights in a periodic report to the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva. It is an important mechanism that the United States helped to establish and has long backed, including when other states have threatened to withdraw from it.

With world leaders now gathering in New York for the annual UN General Assembly, this decision takes on new meaning. As the host nation, the United States holds an outsized leadership role and has—at least rhetorically—been supportive of the United Nations’ mission over the years. While pulling out of the UPR process may, at first, seem consistent with Trump’s “America First” agenda, the reality is that this withdrawal is not only bad for U.S. democracy and human thriving at home, but it also undermines U.S. interests and influence abroad. The United States had already pulled out of the UNHRC earlier this year. Autocratic regimes are now moving swiftly in a scramble for global influence to fill the vacuum left by Trump’s continued retreat.

To be sure, the United States has never been entirely consistent in its prioritization of human rights, which often took a back seat to other geopolitical concerns. However, these rights were at least carefully considered as diplomats crafted U.S. foreign policy. Although inspired to a certain degree by idealism, advancing human rights has also been motivated by pure self-interest as well. Experience shows that protecting and advancing human rights globally leads to greater stability and prosperity, opens markets for U.S. businesses, protects Americans abroad, and reduces migration pressures on those who might otherwise flee oppression or poverty. Furthermore, countries that respect human rights are better geopolitical allies and trading partners and do not resort to war to resolve disputes.