Article,
Assessing Human Rights in China: Why the Double Standard?
Cornell International Law Journal, (2005)RANDALL PEERENBOOM University of California, Los Angeles - School of Law.
Abstract
China is often singled out as one of worst human rights violators
in the world today. On the other hand, the Chinese government regularly
issues reports chock-full of statistics showing considerable progress
on a wide variety of fronts, and proudly claims that Chinese citizens
enjoy more rights than ever before. While not denying that much remains
to be done, the government maintains its critics are biased, human
rights are being misused for political purposes, and China is being
subject to a double standard. Many Chinese citizens feel the same
way.
The very fact that government leaders and Chinese citizens feel China
is being held to double standards, whether or not it is true, has
several negative consequences for human rights. Beijing has been
reluctant to allow visits by inspectors from the U.N. or other countries,
and has imposed restrictions on their visits. In response to the
annual U.S. State Department report, China now issues its own critical
report on the rights situation in the U.S. In addition, China has
cancelled bilateral dialogues on human rights and programs on rule
of law in response to the attempts to censure it in Geneva.
The public's support for international reform efforts has also been
weakened. Many citizens are suspicious about the motives of NGOs.
Public opinion about America, seen as the leader of Western critics,
has undergone a dramatic shift in the last twenty years, from wildly
supportive to highly critical.
Is China subject to a double standard? I argue based on comparative
empirical studies of rights performance that it is, and offer several
explanations why. Part I provides a brief overview of China's official
policy on human rights and China's involvement in international human
rights regime.
Part II examines how China does relative to other countries, particularly
other countries at its income level, in physical integrity rights,
civil and political rights, social and economic rights; quality of
governance; law and order and social stability; women's rights; and
cultural or minority rights. While China scores well below the average
in its lower middle income category on civil and political rights,
it outperforms the average country in its income class on virtually
all other indicators, supporting the claim that China is subject
to a double standard.
Part III considers several reasons why China seems to be held to a
higher standard than other countries. Some critics argue the attention
paid to China is warranted because, given China's huge population,
addressing problems in China will benefit so many people. However,
India has a population nearly as large as China. And yet, despite
a human rights record that falls short of China's on most indicators,
India has not received anywhere near as much critical scrutiny as
China.
A second, more likely explanation is that the international human
rights community remains biased toward civil and political rights,
the area in which China is the weakest.
Third, and related, non-democratic countries are held to higher standards
than democratic countries.
Fourth, China is singled out because of its geopolitical importance.
For some, China has assumed the role played by Russia during the
Cold War – the evil empire that must be opposed at every turn.
Fifth, China presents a normative challenge to the human rights regime.
As suggested by the debate over Asian values, China is likely to
take advantage of its growing economic and geopolitical influence
to defend and advocate rights policies and normative vision of the
world at odds with current rights policies based on secular liberalism
even in the face of Western opposition.
Sixth, much of the reporting on China by the general media and human
rights monitors tends to focus on particular horrific cases of human
rights violations that are not representative of the system as a
whole. This creates a mistaken impression of how serious the problems
are.
On the other hand, the government's lack of transparency, combined
with the egregious nature of some violations, leads people to suspect
the worse, and fuels images of China as a repressive totalitarian
state.
Part IV concludes with a brief discussion of the benefits of avoiding
a double standard.
