Fill out the brief form below for access to the free report.
This blog originally appeared on www.freedomcollection.org.
The Woodrow Wilson Center recently held an event on “Understanding and Responding to Attacks on Civil Society.” The panelists for this discussion were Carl Gershman, president of the National Endowment for Democracy; Nilda Bullain, operational vice president for the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law; and Maina Kiai, United Nations special rapporteur on freedom of assembly and association. A notable panel of scholars. In this otherwise typical Washington policy event, there were two particular moments of note—and frustration. The first came from Mr. Kiai. In typical UN fashion – perhaps in an attempt to appear balanced – Mr. Kiai called out the United States and Switzerland for concerns over freedom of assembly but praised the so-called general consensus on the success of the Chinese model of development. He went further to single out what he considered “extremism” within the United States, a veiled reference to the civil society Tea Party movement. Mr. Kiai’s presentation epitomized the frustrations that many freedom advocates have with the United Nations. While I appreciate the attempt at balance, a panelist’s time is zero sum. For every minute Mr. Kiai discussed Switzerland or the U.S., he took away from time that could have been spent highlighting the extreme conditions for civil society in North Korea or Cuba. And in his laudatory remarks about China, Mr. Kiai stepped beyond his role on the panel as a defender of freedom of association – a right that the Chinese government does not respect. The second exchange of note occurred when two representatives of the Russian embassy challenged NED president Carl Gershman on his views of Russia’s new draconian NGO law, which among other thing forces onerous registration processes and includes harsh penalties for breaking the law, even up to hard labor. They stated that, while in the United States we have robust legislation on lobbying; in Russia there was no such thing which necessitated this law. With his singular clarity, Gershman responded. The problem with the Russian government, he said, is that it views civil society as “a bunch of lobbyists” representing foreign interests – not as legitimate interlocutors of the Russian people. TKO. Despite sometimes being dull, events like these are important and remind us just how far there is to go in defending freedom around the world.
This post was written by Joel D. Hirst, a Human Freedom Fellow at the George W. Bush Institute. Find him on Twitter: @joelhirst
Before joining the George W. Bush Institute, Joel Hirst was a recipient of the prestigious International Affairs Fellowship at the Council on Foreign Relations, where he researched the Cuba/Venezuela-sponsored Bolivarian Alliance of the Americas. He worked for six years with USAID’s Office of Transition Initiatives in Uganda, focusing on post-conflict transition in Lord’s Resistance Army–affected areas. In Venezuela, he worked for four years on democracy promotion, elections, civil society, and human rights. Prior to this, Hirst worked as a humanitarian relief worker with World Vision in countries such as Pakistan, Venezuela, Kosovo, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Chad, Honduras, and Nicaragua. He writes and appears frequently in the media.
To find out more about Joel, you can also visit his personal website.Full Bio
Chinese Prisoner’s Death Holds a Message for Americans and China
Liu Xiaobo, China’s most prominent dissident and Nobel Peace Prize winner died this week. His death holds a message for Americans and for China.
Release of Chinese Political Prisoner a Timely Reminder to Support Freedom Advocates Abroad
More than half the world’s population still lives in countries where basic political rights and civil liberties are only partly respected, if at all.
Bringing Freedom to the Forefront of 21st Century Politics
Is the global liberal democratic order in danger? Purposefully constructed in the aftermath of World War II, this order -- and the American leadership that is central to its success --has contributed to securing peace and expanding prosperity in the United States and around the world. Today, that order appears to be dissolving. This crisis is not new or sudden; it has been mounting for several years. Global challenges like authoritarian capitalism, violent extremism, demographic pressures, and displaced populations have placed global freedom in decline. Fraying traditional alliances united by core values of freedom are increasingly weak to respond. It is alarming that the downdraft in democratic resilience over the past decade or more includes countries that have long been part of the consolidated democratic West. This is democratic deconsolidation. In much of the Western world, we see a rise in demagogic populism, illiberalism, nationalism, protectionism, and waning conf
The Importance of Speaking Truth to Tyrants
What the president of the United States says matters. Even during the realpolitik policies of détente under Richard Nixon, it was still clear that American policy was based on a set of core values. Nixon’s practical goals of reaching deals with America’s adversaries was never based on the “great chemistry” with himself or praising the Soviet or Communist Chinese leadership doing a “fantastic job.” When the president aligns himself with the autocrats and dictators, he aligns America with their oppression. He sends a message that corruption and brutality are not our concern. Contrast that with how Ronald Reagan defied much of world opinion in calling out the brutality of the Soviet system. Natan Sharansky, then a refusenik imprisoned in a Soviet gulag, later wrote for the Weekly Standard of his thoughts on Reagan’s pronouncement that the USSR was an evil empire: “It was the great, brilliant moment whe