The East Asian Challenge to Human Rights

Reflections on an East West Dialogue

Bibliographic Data

ID7526604
AuthorsDaniel Bell (0000-0001-5637-283X), Daniel A Bell (0000-0002-5521-3383, corresponding author)
Year1996
Volume18
Issue3
Pages641-667
Publication date1996-08-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueHuman Rights Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0275-0392 • E-ISSN: 1085-794X
PublisherJohns Hopkins University Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1353/hrq.1996.0027
OpenAlexW2061404973
LanguageEN
Citations received24
References cited11

The East Asian Challenge to Human Rights: Reflections on an East West Dialogue 1 Daniel A. Bell (bio) This paper attempts to get beyond the rhetoric that has dogged the human rights debate and to identify relatively persuasive East Asian criticisms of traditional Western approaches to human rights. It distinguishes among three sorts of arguments for a culturally sensitive approach to human rights: (1) the argument that situation-specific justifications for the temporary curtailment of particular human rights can only be countered following the acquisition of substantial local knowledge; (2) the argument that East Asian cultural traditions may well provide the resources to justify and increase [End Page 641] local commitment to values and practices that in the West are typically realized through a human rights regime; and (3) the argument that distinctive East Asian conceptions of vital human interests may justify some political practices that differ to some extent from human rights regimes typically endorsed in Western countries. This typology is intended to clarify the “East Asian Challenge to Human Rights” and thus reduce the likelihood of “civilizational” conflict over human rights issues. It is a notable fact of the contemporary world that gross human rights violations tend to occur “off the record.” Few governments will admit to murdering political opponents, torturing members of minority ethnic groups, or forcing women and children into slavery, much less justify obvious human rights transgressions in public forums. 2 In such cases the task of the human rights activist is to expose the gap between public allegiance to human rights and the sad reality of ongoing rights abuses. However, there is not much point deliberating about the desirability of practices that all condemn at the level of principle. The disputed area of human rights therefore falls outside what Michael Walzer terms the “minimal and universal moral code,” namely rights against murder, slavery, torture, and genocide. 3 This “grey” area of debate includes criminal law, family law, social and economic rights, the rights of indigenous peoples, and the attempt to universalize Western-style democratic practices. Some of these issues are contested on cultural grounds, others are a matter of how rights are prioritized in developing nations. Not [End Page 642] all human rights values and practices typically endorsed in Western countries are automatically accepted elsewhere, and dialogue between interested parties may well help to identify areas of commonality and difference. A new discourse on human rights may be emerging in the East Asian region, currently the fastest growing part of the world. The human rights positions of senior Asian officials such as Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore and Prime Minister Mohamad Mahathir of Malaysia are well known, but less publicized are the more nuanced views of critical intellectuals in East Asia. 4 Neither wholly rejecting the concept of human rights nor wholly endorsing the values and practices ordinarily realized through a human rights regime in the Western world, these intellectuals are being prompted to reflect on and debate over how to locate themselves in a human rights discourse in which they have not heretofore played a substantial part. In light of the growing economic and military might of the East Asian region, it is particularly important for the West to consider the more persuasive East Asian viewpoints on human rights. The alternative—efforts to promote human rights that do not seriously engage East Asian perspectives on these issues—risks widening misunderstandings, setting the stage for hostilities that otherwise could be avoided. This paper distinguishes among three sorts of arguments put forward by East Asian critics of Western approaches to human rights and suggests these arguments’ implications for the human rights discourse. Part I addresses the claim often asserted by East Asian governments that a right must be temporarily curtailed in order to deal with an unfortunate set of particular social and political circumstances. Once the perceived crisis is over, according to this view, then the rights denial is no longer justified. This viewpoint is not in the first instance a “cultural clash” over human rights, 5 as both the government in question and the human rights activist share a common set of moral and political aspirations as an end goal. The second and third

Argument (complex analysis · Environmental ethics · Human rights · International human rights law · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Rhetoric · Sociology · Typology · Anthropology · Law · Legal Issues in South Africa · Legal Rights and Human Rights · Multicultural Socio-Legal Studies

Tools

Open DOI