ANALYSIS: Does religious freedom report need more ‘teeth’?

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration isn’t afraid to call out Republicans for playing politics on Capitol Hill, or Wall Street … Continued

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration isn’t afraid to call out Republicans for playing politics on Capitol Hill, or Wall Street for runaway profits or insurance companies for health care woes.

But why, when it comes to protecting religious freedom abroad, is the State Department so hesitant to name names?

Watchdogs say the State Department missed a key opportunity to put teeth into its annual assessment of global religious freedom, which was released by Secretary of State John Kerry Monday (May 20).

Continuing a pattern begun under President George W. Bush, the report does not include a list of “countries of particular concern,” or “CPCs” — the diplomatic term for countries that either actively suppress religious freedom or don’t do enough to protect it.

The list varies little from year to year — North Korea, Iran, China and a handful of others are routinely cited as the worst offenders. But the new report contains no worst-of-the-worst list that would single out offenders for sanctions or other punishment.

The lack of new CPC designations in the report is a big flaw, according to Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., the dean of religious liberty watchdogs on Capitol Hill.

“As religious freedom conditions continue to deteriorate globally, it is more important than ever that the State Department use this vital tool to press governments to end abuses, protect their citizens and respect this fundamental human right,” said Wolf and two other congressmen who fired off a letter to Kerry on Monday.

Their concern was echoed by others who monitor religious liberty abroad, including the U.S. Commission on Religious Freedom, the independent body created by Congress that each year puts out its own list of worst violators.

Knox Thames, USCIRF’s director of policy and research, said the commission believes that the 1998 law that mandates the State Department report also requires new designations of CPCs annually. The current CPC list dates from 2011.

For years the annual report and the CPC designations were simultaneous; that changed late in the Bush administration and has been continued under Obama, Thames said. But the list of CPCs “is what gave all of this teeth,” he said.

The list prompts “countries to do things they don’t normally want to do.”

But Aaron Jensen, a spokesman for the State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor said the CPC designations can be made on a different schedule than the report’s release and “at any time as conditions warrant.”

He said he has no information as to when the State Department may release a new CPC list.

Thames said he’s hopeful that the new designations will come out this summer.

They work, he continued, offering Vietnam as an example of a country that bristled at its inclusion on the CPC list. But actual reforms, pressed by U.S. diplomats, resulted in a delisting in 2006.

USCIRF — which generally pushes the State Department to be more aggressive in insisting on religious freedom reforms in its diplomacy — in April recommended that all eight countries on the State Department’s current CPC list be redesignated: Myanmar, China, Eritrea, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Uzbekistan.

USCIRF also wants an additional seven countries added to the CPC list: Egypt, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Vietnam.

It’s true, said Paul Marshall, a senior fellow with the Washington-based Hudson Institute who specializes in religious freedom, that the State Department’s CPC  list has been “very stable for a long time.”

And there are certainly some entrenched, authoritarian governments, such as North Korea’s, that don’t care if they make the list or not. But that doesn’t mean the CPC list and the report in general are not valuable, Marshall said.

Take CPC-designated Saudi Arabia, he said, where non-Muslim religious practice is still officially forbidden. The U.S. has pressed Saudi officials on the topic, and in recent years, the Saudis have said that they are not going out of their way to root out non-Muslim observances, though they still prosecute them when they see them.

And in Myanmar, a long-standing member of the CPC club, the religious freedom situation has been fluid, and is something we want our government to keep track of, Marshall said. So “the list is a good thing.”

Jamsheed K. Choksy, a professor of Central Eurasian Studies at Indiana University and an incoming USCIRF fellow, said the problem is actually larger than the report or whether the CPCs are included.

“What needs to happen is that the government of the United States needs to take these reports and make them central aspects of American policy and foreign relations,” he said.

Retired Ambassador Randolph Bell, who runs the First Freedom Center, a Virginia-based religious freedom watchdog group, took a similar view. The lack or inclusion of new CPCs isn’t as crucial as whether U.S. foreign policy is going to act on the information gathered by its own staff, and make religious freedom an organizing principle for U.S. bilateral and multilateral relations.

But in any case, Bell said, the U.S. needs to keep churning these reports out to keep attention focused on the cause of the repressed faithful.

“If they’re not there,” Bell said of the reports, “then wouldn’t people who are focused entirely on U.S. trade and economics, or people focused on some other aspect of global affairs, say climate change, just go about their business?”


Copyright: For copyright information, please check with the distributor of this item, Religion News Service LLC.


    What about religious freedom here in the U.S.? There are at least 6 states in which those who do not believe in your “god” are forbidden to hold elected or appointed office. Of course it’s unconstitutional, but those states don’t give a rat’s a** about the Constitution.

    Or are you only concerned about freedom for your sect or cult?

  • reformthesystem

    Except the PRC and North Korea which generally hold all religions to be “opiates” (as Marx wrote), most other countries that Secretary of State Kerry’s report on religious freedom names – Saudi Arabia, Iran, Eritrea, Sudan and Uzbekistan – target non-Islamic religions through brutal “laws” punishing “blasphemy” and imposing death, usually by beheading, for proselytizing and apostasy. If Secretary Kerry were in any way serious, he would be sponsoring US legal measures with “teeth” to discourage the savagery being used for world domination of Islamic ideology


    The report omits mention of the Obama-encouraged-Muslim-Brotherhood current regimes in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia. Did the employee responsible for the Benghazi fiasco have any hand in that? As a sop to President Obama’s Saudi royal family friends and his friend Erdogan’s Muslim Brotherhood in Turkey, near the end the report deceptively complains about European countries (which, in truth, through the European Charter on Human Rights recognize more religious freedom than the USA, along with strong legal prohibitions on religious discrimination). The report weeps: “Government restrictions, which often coincided with societal animosity, resulted in anti-Muslim actions that affected everyday life for numerous believers.” Kerry, who lived in France and knows better, whines: “The impact ranged from education, to employment, to personal safety within communities.”

    If Kerry were even to bother to look at the everyday lives, often on welfare, that Muslims who have moved into Europe are gouging for themselves and then try to communicate his crocodile-tears to the family of the fatally stabbed Lee Rigby in London, and to Cedric Cordier who was stabbed in Paris, and to the store owners and car owners in Stockholm and other European victims of arsonist and knife wielding radical Islamists who have been abusing the rights and welfare afforded to them by the European Charter, he would have to choke on his own bull poop.