By Rudy Barnes, Jr.
Pope Francis and Prince Zeid Raad
al-Hussein of Jordan, the UN high commissioner for human rights, are voices of reason
and hope in the cacophony surrounding issues of religion, human rights and
politics. Donald Trump and his Secretary
of State, Rex Tillerson, are foils to Pope Francis and Prince Zeid with their advocacy
of political expediency, or realpolitik.
The central issue is reconciling
human rights with religion and politics, and Pope Francis and Prince Zeid are
trying to do just that—the Pope from a religious perspective and Prince Zeid
from a political perspective. Both are
fighting uphill battles against religious fundamentalists and the radical right
populist demagogues they are supporting around the world.
In contrast to his predecessor, Pope
Benedict, Pope Francis has initiated personal encounters with authoritarian
Muslim leaders like Erdogan of Turkey and el-Sissi of Egypt and urged them to
comply with fundamental human rights.
Prince Zeid has emphasized how the ideal of human rights is also
politically expedient, “as the best antidote against extremism.”
Human rights in this context are
those political freedoms and rights provided in the U.S. Constitution and the
International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) provides another variety of human rights that
are based on economic benefits rather than political freedom.
The U.S. is a party to the ICCPR but
not the ICESCR. The ICCPR provides
libertarian rights that can be enforced by international law, while the ICESCR defines
political aspirations for economic entitlements rather than political freedom. Such entitlements cannot be uniformly defined
and enforced since they depend on the varying capabilities of nations to provide
them.
With rights come responsibilities,
and justice requires that individual rights are balanced with the collective
obligation to provide for the common good.
Religion plays a pivotal role in balancing these conflicting objectives,
but there is a problem: All ancient religions taught the moral obligation to provide
for the common good, but none addressed individual rights.
It was not until after the
Enlightenment of the 18th century that democracy and human rights became
political and religious priorities in libertarian democracies, but in many
Islamic nations human rights have remained subordinate to immutable Islamic Law
known as Shari’a, as provided in the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights of 1990.
Equal justice under law requires that
human rights are not constrained by religious law, and that individual rights
are balanced with providing for the common good. That creates a two-fold problem: In the U.S.
individual rights have been emphasized at the expense of providing for the
common good, while the opposite is the norm in Islamic nations where Shari’a
prevails.
Promoting human rights overseas is
an ideal of U.S. foreign policy, but it has been compromised by moral ambiguity
and political expediency. That has been evident
in the way the U.S. has ignored flagrant violations of human rights to
accommodate its allies.
Jews, Christians and Muslims all
claim the greatest commandment to
love God and their neighbors—including those neighbors of other races and
religions—as they love themselves as a
common word of faith; but they have failed to apply that moral imperative to
their politics. Americans love their
individual rights, but don’t promote them for those beyond their borders.
Safi Kaskas has noted that a common word is not enough to bring
peace between Christians and Muslims, but he is hopeful that the 2016 Marrakesh
Declaration in Morocco and conferences this year at Al-Azhar University in
Egypt coupled with the visit of Pope Francis can reverse dangerous religious
polarization and promote human rights in Islamic nations.
Muslim scholars differ on human
rights, and Prince Zeid’s activist promotion of human rights “has been
criticized in the region for airing its dirty laundry. [But] Zeid made the case that there is a link
between a country’s respect for human rights and its political stability—a link
that explains how dictatorships have come undone in the Middle East over the
past several years.”
Pope Francis and Prince Zeid are
ambassadors of Christianity and Islam in a world plagued by religious and
political extremism and violence. They exemplify
how the love of God and neighbor is a shared value of Jews, Christians and
Muslims that can promote human rights and a politics of reconciliation in a
world that seems hell-bent on its own destruction.
Notes and commentary on related
topics:
On the initiatives of Pope Francis,
see Francis and Benedict: two popes, two
divergent approached to Islam at http://religionnews.com/2017/05/02/francis-and-benedict-two-popes-two-divergent-approaches-to-islam/.
On Prince Zeid, see The Arab Prince standing up to Trump at http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/05/02/the-arab-prince-standing-up-to-trump/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=FP&utm_term=Flashpoints.
On Safi Kaskas’ call for Christian
and Muslim leaders to address religious grievances and promote human rights,
see http://religionnews.com/2017/05/08/peace-will-require-leaders-christian-and-muslim-to-address-real-grievances/. On the Marrakesh Declaration of 2016, see https://www.pambazuka.org/human-security/marrakesh-declaration-rights-religious-minorities-predominantly-muslim-majority. On the Al-Azhar Declaration on Citizenship and
Coexistence of March 2017, see http://www.azhar.eg/observer-en/al-azhar-declaration-on-citizenship-and-coexistence-issued-by-his-eminence-the-grand-imam-of-al-azhar.
On what Rex Tillerson gets right about American values—and what he gets
wrong about human rights, see https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/what-rex-tillerson-gets-right-about-american-values--and-what-he-gets-wrong/2017/05/04/27954fb2-30eb-11e7-9dec-764dc781686f_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions&wpmm=1; also on Tillerson and human rights, see https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/05/04/tillerson-shows-why-he-was-a-rotten-choice-to-head-the-state-department/?wpisrc=nl_popns&wpmm=1.
On the U.S. Department of State Country
Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2016, see https://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/humanrightsreport/#fndtn-panel1-3.
On how geopolitical realignments and
the rise of popular nationalism [including the election of Donald Trump] have
unleashed a global backlash against human rights, see http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/07/welcome-to-the-post-human-rights-world/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=FP&utm_term=Flashpoints.
The Preamble to the Cairo Declaration
of Human Rights in Islam of 1990 provides that human rights are …an integral part of the Islamic religion
and that no one shall have the right as a matter of principle to abolish them
either in whole or in part or to violate or ignore them as they are divine
commands, which are contained in the Revealed Books of Allah; and Article
24 provides specifically what the Preamble implies: All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject
to the Islamic Shari’a. Article 25
provides: The Islamic Shari’a is the only
source of reference for the explanation or clarification to any of the articles
of this Declaration. See Religion, Law and Conflicting Concepts of
Legitimacy, at page 7, notes 22 and 23, posted as a Resource at http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/p/resources.html.
On the diversity of opinions among
Muslim scholars on human rights under Shari’a, see Religion, Law and Conflicting Concepts of Legitimacy, at pages
9-16, posted as a Resource at http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/p/resources.html.
On religion and reason, see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2014/12/religion-and-reason.html.
On faith and freedom, see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2014/12/faith-and-freedom.html.
On the greatest commandment as a
common word of faith, see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2015/01/the-greatest-commandment-common-word-of.html.
On religion and human rights, see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2015/02/religion-and-human-rights.html.
On religion, human rights and national security, see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2015/05/religion-human-rights-and-national.html.
On balancing individual rights with providing for the common good, see
http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2015/08/balancing-individual-rights-with.html.
On how religious fundamentalism and secularism shape politics and human
rights, see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2015/08/how-religious-fundamentalism-and.html.
On religion, the Pope and politics in the real world, see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2015/09/religion-pope-and-politics-in-real-world.html.
On the politics of loving our neighbors as ourselves, see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2016/01/the-politics-of-loving-our-neighbors-as.html.
On we are known by the friends we keep, see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2016/02/we-are-known-by-friends-we-keep.html.
On liberty in law: a matter of man’s law, not God’s law, see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2016/09/liberty-in-law-matter-of-mans-law-not.html.
On the evolution of religion and politics from oppression to freedom,
see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2016/09/the-evolution-of-religion-and-politics.html.
On religion and a politics of reconciliation based on shared values,
see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2016/11/religion-and-politics-of-reconciliation_19.html.
On religion, liberty and justice at home and abroad, see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2016/11/religion-liberty-and-justice-at-home.html
On
moral ambiguity in religion and politics,
see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2017/03/moral-ambiguity-in-religion-and-politics.html.
On ignorance and reason in religion and politics, see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2017/03/ignorance-and-reason-in-religion-and.html.
On human rights, freedom and national security, see http://www.religionlegitimacyandpolitics.com/2017/04/human-rights-freedom-and-national.html.
No comments:
Post a Comment