（下边有中文翻译请继续看到底。 谢谢。）
Human rights are universally acknowledged as fundamental principles that safeguard human dignity, freedom, and equality. 人权是公认的保障人的尊严、自由和平等的基本原则。
Human rights are universally acknowledged as fundamental principles that safeguard human dignity, freedom, and equality. However, their interpretation and application often vary across cultures, political systems, and historical contexts. A growing concern in the international community is the politicization of human rights, especially by Western powers, which selectively wield the human rights agenda to target political rivals while ignoring or downplaying violations by allied nations. This practice not only undermines the credibility of human rights advocacy but also exacerbates global divisions, fueling mistrust among nations.
Western Politicization of Human Rights
The West, led by countries like the United States, often presents itself as the custodian of global human rights. Through mechanisms such as annual human rights reports, it regularly criticizes nations like China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran, portraying them as violators of fundamental freedoms. However, glaring inconsistencies reveal a troubling double standard.
For example, Israel’s ongoing treatment of Palestinians, including the illegal occupation of territories, displacement of civilians, and restrictions on basic rights, is widely documented by international organizations such as the UN and Amnesty International. Yet, Western powers, particularly the US, continue to shield Israel from accountability by vetoing resolutions at the UN and providing unwavering military and financial support.
Similarly, in India, grave human rights violations in regions like Kashmir, where communication blackouts, mass detentions, and suppression of dissent are rampant, receive muted criticism. Despite evidence of systemic discrimination against Muslims and other minorities, India remains a favored partner of the West due to its geopolitical significance in countering China.
These selective practices erode the moral authority of Western nations in human rights advocacy, casting doubt on their sincerity and intentions.
The Chinese Approach to Human Rights
China’s perspective on human rights differs fundamentally from the Western model. Rooted in its historical and cultural context, China emphasizes collective rights over individual freedoms. For Beijing, economic development, social stability, and national sovereignty are seen as prerequisites for realizing broader human rights.
China asserts that development itself is a fundamental human right. This philosophy is evident in its unprecedented achievement of lifting over 800 million people out of poverty in just a few decades. By prioritizing economic prosperity and infrastructure development, initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) are framed as contributions to global human rights by fostering shared growth and reducing inequality.
Furthermore, China advocates for a pluralistic interpretation of human rights, arguing that each nation should be free to define and implement these rights based on its cultural, historical, and socio-economic conditions.
The Islamic Approach to Human Rights
The Islamic worldview offers a comprehensive and balanced framework for human rights, rooted in divine guidance. Unlike the secular, individual-centric Western model, the Islamic approach integrates spiritual, moral, and social dimensions, ensuring that individual rights do not conflict with collective welfare.
Islam emphasizes the sanctity of life, justice, equality, and protection of human dignity. These principles are enshrined in the Qur’an and Sunnah, forming the basis of Islamic governance and jurisprudence. For example, the rights to life, property, and freedom of religion are inviolable, while societal duties ensure that these rights are upheld equitably.
Importantly, the Islamic model also considers the context of cultural and societal diversity. It rejects the imposition of a single, universal standard, advocating instead for mutual respect and understanding among nations.
Western vs. Chinese and Islamic Approaches
The Western human rights framework, primarily shaped by liberal democracies, prioritizes individual freedoms such as free speech, assembly, and political participation. While these rights are vital, the Western approach often overlooks the socio-economic and cultural realities of non-Western societies. Its insistence on universal application disregards the diversity of traditions, religions, and governance models across the globe.
In contrast, the Chinese model emphasizes collective well-being, economic growth, and sovereignty, while the Islamic approach harmonizes individual and societal rights within a moral and spiritual framework. Both models highlight the inadequacy of a one-size-fits-all human rights standard, calling for a more inclusive and culturally sensitive discourse.
The Double Standards in Human Rights Advocacy
The selective application of human rights principles by Western nations often targets countries that resist their geopolitical agendas. This approach undermines the universality and impartiality of human rights advocacy. For example:
- China: Criticized for its policies in Xinjiang and Hong Kong, China’s achievements in poverty eradication and development are largely ignored.
- Russia: Consistently vilified for domestic policies, while similar practices in allied nations are overlooked.
- Muslim World: Countries like Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey are frequently singled out, while abuses in Saudi Arabia or Egypt, allied to Western interests, face little scrutiny.
Such practices reinforce the perception that human rights are less about protecting human dignity and more about advancing strategic interests.
A Call for Broad-Based Human Rights Standards
To address these challenges, it is crucial to move towards a more inclusive and pluralistic approach to human rights. This requires recognizing the legitimacy of diverse cultural, religious, and political systems in shaping human rights frameworks. The following steps are essential:
- Promoting Dialogue: Encouraging conversations among nations to develop consensus-based standards that respect cultural and historical diversity.
- Rejecting Double Standards: Ensuring equal scrutiny and accountability for all nations, regardless of their geopolitical alignments.
- Focusing on Development: Recognizing socio-economic progress as a cornerstone of human dignity and prioritizing global cooperation to address inequality.
Summary
Human rights are a universal aspiration, but their implementation must respect the diversity of human societies. The West’s politicization of this issue, marked by double standards and selective criticism, undermines the integrity of global advocacy. Nations like China and the Muslim world offer alternative approaches that prioritize development, collective welfare, and cultural specificity, demonstrating that human dignity can be achieved through diverse pathways.
The global community must adopt a more balanced and inclusive approach, ensuring that human rights serve as a bridge for cooperation rather than a tool for division. Only by rejecting politicization and embracing diversity can the true essence of human rights be upheld for all.
人权是公认的保障人的尊严、自由和平等的基本原则。然而，它们的解释和应用往往因文化、政治制度和历史背景而异。国际社会日益关注的是人权政治化，特别是西方大国有选择地运用人权议程来针对政治对手，同时忽视或淡化盟国的侵权行为。这种做法不仅破坏了人权倡导的可信度，而且加剧了全球分歧，助长了国家之间的不信任。
西方人权政治化
以美国等国家为首的西方经常把自己描绘成全球人权的守护者。通过年度人权报告等机制，它定期批评中国、俄罗斯、北韩和伊朗等国，将它们描述为侵犯基本自由的国家。然而，明显的不一致暴露了令人不安的双重标准。
例如，以色列对巴勒斯坦人的持续待遇，包括非法占领领土，流离失所的平民，以及对基本权利的限制，被联合国和国际特赦组织等国际组织广泛记录。然而，西方大国，尤其是美国，继续通过在联合国否决决议和坚定不移地提供军事和财政支持来保护以色列免于承担责任。
同样，在印度，在通讯中断、大规模拘留和镇压异见者猖獗的克什米尔等地区，严重侵犯人权的行为受到了无声的批评。尽管有证据表明印度对穆斯林和其他少数民族存在系统性歧视，但由于其在对抗中国方面的地缘政治意义，印度仍然是西方青睐的合作伙伴。
这些选择性做法侵蚀了西方国家在人权倡导方面的道德权威，使人怀疑他们的诚意和意图。
中国的人权观
中国的人权观与西方模式有着根本的不同。由于其历史和文化背景，中国强调集体权利高于个人自由。对北京来说，经济发展、社会稳定和国家主权被视为实现更广泛人权的先决条件。
中国坚持发展本身就是一项基本人权。这一理念体现在中国在短短几十年内使8亿多人摆脱贫困的空前成就上。通过优先考虑经济繁荣和基础设施建设，“一带一路”等倡议通过促进共享增长和减少不平等，为全球人权做出了贡献。
此外，中国倡导对人权的多元解释，认为每个国家都应该根据其文化、历史和社会经济条件自由定义和实施这些权利。
伊斯兰对人权的态度
伊斯兰的世界观为人权提供了一个全面而平衡的框架，它植根于神的指引。与世俗的、以个人为中心的西方模式不同，伊斯兰的方法整合了精神、道德和社会层面，确保个人权利不与集体福利相冲突。
伊斯兰教强调生命的神圣、正义、平等和对人类尊严的保护。这些原则庄严载入《古兰经》和《圣训》，构成了伊斯兰教治理和法理的基础。例如，生命、财产和宗教自由的权利是不可侵犯的，而社会责任确保这些权利得到公平维护。
重要的是，伊斯兰模式还考虑了文化和社会多样性的背景。它反对强加一个单一的、普遍的标准，主张国家之间相互尊重和理解。
西方vs中国和伊斯兰的方法
西方的人权框架，主要是由自由民主国家形成的，优先考虑个人自由，如言论自由、集会自由和政治参与。虽然这些权利至关重要，但西方的做法往往忽视了非西方社会的社会经济和文化现实。它坚持普遍适用，无视全球传统、宗教和治理模式的多样性。
相比之下，中国模式强调集体福祉、经济增长和主权，而伊斯兰的方法则在道德和精神框架内协调个人和社会权利。这两种模式都强调了一刀切的人权标准的不足之处，呼吁进行更具包容性和文化敏感性的讨论。
人权倡导的双重标准
西方国家选择性地应用人权原则，往往针对那些抵制其地缘政治议程的国家。这种做法破坏了人权倡导的普遍性和公正性。例如:
中国：中国在新疆和香港的政策受到批评，中国在消除贫困和发展方面取得的成就在很大程度上被忽视。
俄罗斯：一贯因国内政策受到诋毁，而盟国的类似做法却被忽视。
穆斯林世界：像伊朗、巴基斯坦和土耳其这样的国家经常被单独挑出来，而与西方利益结盟的沙特阿拉伯或埃及的虐待行为却很少受到审查。
这种做法强化了一种观念，即人权与其说是保护人类尊严，不如说是促进战略利益。
呼吁建立基础广泛的人权标准
为应对这些挑战，至关重要的是要朝着更加包容和多元化的人权方针迈进。这就需要认识到各种文化、宗教和政治制度在形成人权框架方面的合法性。以下步骤是必不可少的：
促进对话：鼓励各国之间进行对话，以制定基于共识的标准，尊重文化和历史的多样性。
拒绝双重标准：确保对所有国家进行平等的审查和问责，无论其地缘政治联盟如何。
聚焦发展：认识到社会经济进步是人类尊严的基石，优先开展全球合作以解决不平等问题。
总结
人权是一项普遍的愿望，但人权的实现必须尊重人类社会的多样性。西方将这一问题政治化，采取双重标准和选择性批评，破坏了全球倡导的完整性。中国和穆斯林世界等国家提供了优先考虑发展、集体福利和文化特殊性的替代途径，表明人类尊严可以通过多种途径实现。
国际社会必须采取更加平衡和包容的做法，确保人权成为合作的桥梁，而不是分裂的工具。
( 注意： 本文是用AI翻译的，或有误差。请以原版英文为准。谢谢。)
Reference Link:- https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2024/11/29/the-politicization-of-human-rights-must-end/