HUMAN RIGHTS AND

FOREIGN POLICY DEBATES

The Conservative and Libertarian ideologies behind why the U.S. government
should or should not intervene with China’s Reeducation Camps.

MALEIGH ARNOLD
Valdosta State University
PHIL 4120
 1

In accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - Articles 1 through 301 -

a universal pronouncement protecting certain inalienable rights of all citizens - the People’s

Republic of China has, and is, been breaking international law. For several years now, the

People’s Republic of China, the PRC I may now refer to as, has violated the incontrovertible

rights of over one million Uyghur Muslim’s and other ethnic groups2. Article 4 of the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights verbatim,” No one shall be held in slavery or servitude …”, along

with Article 5 continuing,” No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or

degrading treatment or punishment.”3 – yet as you’ll see in Image I, a photo from China’s “re-

education camps”, there is a tragic similarity to what is still considered one of the most inhumane

genocide attacks, the Holocaust – as shown in Image II below.

1
A Declaration signed by all nations world-wide, committing to certain unalienable rights of all people’s regardless
of sex, race, religion, and other bias. This declaration was placed into effect over 70 years prior to this date
(specifically on, 10 December 1948). China has been denying all accusations brought against them by certain
parliaments.
UNITED NATIONS, “Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” accessed October 1, 2020,
https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html.
2
Vicky Xiuzhong Xu et al., accessed October 1, 2020, https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/ad-aspi/2020-
03/Uyghurs%20for%20sale_Final.pdf.
3
UNITED NATIONS, “Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” accessed October 1, 2020,
https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html. para. 13-15
 2

Image 1 Reeducation Camps, China 2020

Image 2 1Concentration Camp in Nazi,

Germany
While the current President of the United

States, Donald Trump, remains on good terms

with the Chinese government, I decided to

compare conservatives and libertarians on their ideologies of humanitarian issues, specifically

the violation of human rights in foreign countries. While evaluating Rushefsky’s ideas, as well as

many authors, on conservative and libertarian foreign policies – I believe both parties to be very

concerned with human rights violations, although currently silent on the crisis in China. My next

question is why.

The United States foreign policy is based upon three goals: National Security, Security of

our Allies and Support of the U.S. economic interests.4 While this does not cover human rights, it

is worth noting that in 2004, The Policy Planning Staff Remarks to the 43rd Annual

International Affairs Symposium,

The topic of this session is who should intervene in humanitarian crises. When it comes

to delivering assistance in permissive environments, the answer is clear.  The lead belongs with

humanitarian actors, including international relief agencies, NGOs, and the aid arms of

national governments and regional organizations5.

4
Mark E. Rushefsky, “Chapter 1 : Process, Structure and Ideology,” in Public Policy in the United States (Armonk,
NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc., 2013), pp. 35-3
5
Stewart Patrick, “The Role of the U.S. Government in Humanitarian Intervention,” U.S. Department of State (U.S.
Department of State, April 5, 2004), https://2001-2009.state.gov/s/p/rem/31299.htm.
 3

So while the United States foreign policies may not directly address human rights, they are very

involved in providing humanitarian aid to suffering countries, refuges and other abiding needs.

Furthermore, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) provides

humanitarian aid to over seventy countries each year; mainly in, Latin American, the Caribbean,

Africa and the Middle East.6

While some foreign government have been covering this massacre, our government

specifically, has been quiet. Remarks from the first Secretary of State in the British parliament,

Dominic Raab7, discusses the clear and serious violation of human rights and freely assumed

international obligation happening in China8. Creating new trade embargos with the Chinese

Hong Kong government in order to reduce the risk of further innocent incarceration amongst

minority groups in China; Not allowing for exports like shackles, smoke bombs and other

firearms9. While president Trump, also identifying as a conservative, is placing tariffs on China

for different reasons – I believe this not to be the conservative ideology Rushefsky describes

here, on page 37, “the conservative position is that if government is to play a role, then it should

6
“Where We Work: Humanitarian Assistance,” U.S. Agency for International Development, August 6, 2020,
https://www.usaid.gov/humanitarian-assistance/where-we-work.
7
“On 21 November 2009, Dominic was selected to represent the Conservatives in Esher and Walton. On 6 May
2010, he was elected MP with 59% of the vote, doubling the Conservative majority, on a turnout of 72%.
In 2011, Dominic was voted ‘Newcomer of the Year’ at The Spectator’s annual Parliamentarian of the Year Awards.
Between 2010 and 2015, he served on the Joint Committee on Human Rights and Education Select Committee”
Dominic Raab, “About Dominic Raab,” Dominic Raab (Peter Szanto , 2019), https://dominicraab.com/about-dom-
raab/.
8
The full quote,” We have been clear about the new national security law that China has imposed on the people of
Hong Kong. That is a clear and serious violation of the UK-China joint declaration, and with it a violation of China’s
freely assumed international obligations”. Para. 4
Dominic Raab and Lisa Nandy, “China,” Hansard, July 20, 2020, https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-07-
20/debates/E0E37EC2-FB95-4FA6-86A7-76F82D2118C3/China.
9
Direct quote “To be clear, the extension of the embargo will mean there will be no exports from the UK to Hong
Kong of potentially lethal weapons, their components or ammunition, and it will also meet a ban on the export of
any equipment not already banned that might be used for internal repression, such as shackles, intercept
equipment, firearms and smoke grenades” para. 6
Dominic Raab and Lisa Nandy, “China,” Hansard, July 20, 2020, https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-07-
20/debates/E0E37EC2-FB95-4FA6-86A7-76F82D2118C3/China.
 4

rely as much as possible on market-like mechanisms, reflecting an emphasis on freedom”10.

Trumps tariffs are not currently based on the ideology of a conservative, he “plans for tariffs on

$50 billion worth of imports from China.  These tariffs are being imposed to encourage China to

change the unfair practices identified in the Section 30111 action with respect to technology and

innovation”12 – not because of the inhumane treatment brought upon millions of minorities.

Without acknowledging China’s known camps, Trump is allowing for a continuum of slavery to

be held in China.

While Conservatives approve the idea of civil interventions, Libertarians are notoriously

known for rejecting the idea of government interventions in most aspects of life; they believe

also, in the inalienable rights of all humans, regardless of any bias. Rushesky says “Libertarians

prefer freedom to both equality and order… Libertarians seek minimal government, one that

does the least amount necessary to keep society and private markets running”13. Although

Libertarians oppose government involvement, they are known for their die-hard protection of

basic human rights. With the definition “Everyone may do anything he wants to do, provided he

does not threaten, or initiate, violence against innocent people”14, I would assume the “middle

party” would be the first to speak on these obvious violent acts. Confirming the thought of

Libertarians wanting to help suffering countries and their people, The Libertarian party states,

10
Mark E. Rushefsky, “Chapter 1 : Process, Structure and Ideology,” in Public Policy in the United States (Armonk,
NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc., 2013), pp. 35-37.
11
“Investigation: Technology Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation,” United States Trade Representative,
August 21, 2017, https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/enforcement/section-301-investigations/section-301-
china/investigation.
12
Donald Trump, “Statement from the President Regarding Trade with China,” The White House (The United States
Government, June 18, 2018), https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-president-regarding-
trade-china-2/.
13
Mark E. Rushefsky, “Chapter 1 : Process, Structure and Ideology,” in Public Policy in the United States (Armonk,
NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc., 2013), pp. 35-37.
14
Block, Walter E. 2015. “Natural Rights, Human Rights, and Libertarianism.” American Journal of Economics &
Sociology 74 (1): 29–62. doi:10.1111/ajes.12086.
 5

“Libertarians believe that American foreign policy should focus more heavily on developing

communications among peoples and finding peaceful resolutions to disagreements”15.

While I presume both parties to believe in the protection of every person’s inalienable

rights, I can conclude that neither party is currently interested in defending the human rights of

the Uyghur Muslim’s and other minorities in China.

15
“Foreign Policy,” Libertarian Party, February 23, 2017, https://www.lp.org/issues/foreign-policy/.
 6

Bibliography

An Image from inside of One of China's "Reeducation Camps" - the Muslims Fate, from This

Photo, Depicts a Similar Resemblance of the Jewish from Nazi Germany's Concentration

Camps. 2020. FanaNews. http://news.fergananews.com/photos/2018/02/prisoners.jpg.

Block, Walter E. 2015. “Natural Rights, Human Rights, and Libertarianism.” American Journal

of Economics & Sociology 74 (1): 29–62. doi:10.1111/ajes.12086.

Doss, Marion. Nazi, Germany - Marion Doss. June 20, 2014. Business Insider.

https://www.businessinsider.com/r-us-judge-says-germany-seeks-philadelphia-man-

accused-of-being-nazi-guard-2014-18.

“Foreign Policy.” Libertarian Party, February 23, 2017. https://www.lp.org/issues/foreign-

policy/.

Patrick, Stewart. “The Role of the U.S. Government in Humanitarian Intervention.” U.S.

Department of State. U.S. Department of State, April 5, 2004. https://2001-

2009.state.gov/s/p/rem/31299.htm.

Raab, Dominic, and Lisa Nandy. “China.” Hansard, July 20, 2020.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-07-20/debates/E0E37EC2-FB95-4FA6-

86A7-76F82D2118C3/China.

Raab, Dominic. “About Dominic Raab.” Dominic Raab. Peter Szanto , 2019.

https://dominicraab.com/about-dom-raab/.

Rushefsky, Mark E. “Chapter 1 : Process, Structure and Ideology.” Essay. In Public Policy in the

United States, 35–37. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc., 2013.

 7

Sriram, C. L.; Martin-Ortega, O.; and Herman, J. (2014). The interplay between war and human

rights. War, Conflict and Human Rights: Theory and Practice (2nd edition). London:

Routledge, pp. 3-13.

UNITED NATIONS. “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” Accessed October 1, 2020.

https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html.

Xiuzhong Xu, Vicky, Danielle Cave, James Leibold, Kelsey Munroe, and Nathan Ruser.

“Uyghurs ForSale.” ‘Re-Education’, Forced Labour and Surveillance beyond Xinjiang.

Reading. Accessed October 1, 2020. https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/ad-

aspi/2020-03/Uyghurs%20for%20sale_Final.pdf.

“Where We Work: Humanitarian Assistance.” U.S. Agency for International Development,

August 6, 2020. https://www.usaid.gov/humanitarian-assistance/where-we-work.