Reprints Online

As a world power, the United States intervenes in many countries' affairs which often involve human rights issues. Although the US claims to oppose violations of human rights, it sometimes supports governments and leaders who utilize their power in uncivilized ways. On the other hand, the US occasionally attacks governments and leaders when they violate human rights. This apparent contradiction is due to the fact that the US and its leaders pursue policies that are in their own self-interest and which are usually independent of the negative externalities that these policies may have on civil rights.

Actions taken in Rwanda are a classic example of how the United States pursues its own self interest. The UN, and many of its members alone, could have prevented hundreds of thousands of lives from being lost, but the US and other world leaders were very worried about public opinion. They didn't want a repeat of the "Blackhawk Down" event which had occurred in Somalia, nor did they want to commit large numbers of troops. This led leaders to use terms such as "accounts of genocide" as opposed to "genocide," and they resolved to these terms only after denying that any genocide was indeed taking place. If the public knew that genocide was transpiring, they would have condemned the government for not taking action, but action by the government might have resulted in high costs and American deaths - neither of which was wanted.

The principle interest of the US during the Cold War was to prevent the Soviet Union from gaining more control - politically and ideologically. This led the US to support dictators such as Samuel Doe of Liberia and Mobutu Seko of Zaire. The US aided such tyrants with millions and sometimes billions of dollars with which the dictators could thwart opposition. While these governments trampled human rights, the US seemed to look the other way, and US interests and support for these countries ended with the Cold War.

Sometimes it is in the best interest of the US to fight violators of human rights, especially since war often brings political support. Such was the case with Kosovo. The Clinton administration launched an attack on Milosevic during the height of the Monica Lewinsky fiasco. The US and the administration were heroes despite the fact that they had failed in Rwanda. Likewise, the recent attack on Iraq came after a large "rally 'round the flag" campaign against terrorism and oppression. When weapons of mass destruction were used in Iraq during the 1980's no attack was discussed and at the time we even had friendly relations with Saddam Hussein.

Although the United States has promoted human rights through the UN and other institutions, its actions in human rights affairs are often inconsistent and irregular. Even though the US wishes to encourage and uphold human rights, it does so only when it is convenient and in harmony with its own self interests

About the Author

Blake Taylor has written many articles about political, financial, and economic issues. To learn more about finance or economics, visit www.fundamentalfinance.com. To read other political articles, go to www.fundamentalfinance.com/blogs.