“As mandated by Congress, every year since 1977, the State Department’s dedicated public servants in U.S. missions abroad and in Washington scrupulously examine, track, and document the state of human rights in nearly 200 countries and territories around the world. In compiling these “Country Reports on Human Rights Practices,” commonly known as the Human Rights Report (HRR), we have drawn from a variety of credible, fact-based sources, including reporting from government agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and media. The HRR helps connect U.S. diplomatic and foreign assistance efforts to the fundamental American value of protecting and promoting respect for human rights for all, while helping to inform the work of civil society, human rights defenders, scholars, multilateral institutions, and others.”.
– 2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
Not anymore.
A March email reviewed by POLITICO revealed plans by the Trump administration to alter the State Department's annual report on human rights practices. In its effort to “streamline” the report, the Administration plans to reduce the report to the minimum requirements of the law, and according to NPR’s analysis of the memo and other documents, to reduce “longstanding critiques of abuses such as harsh prison conditions, government corruption and restrictions on participation in the political process…” Fox News Digital dutifully reported an unnamed State Department official saying, "This year’s modifications are critical for removing report redundancy, increasing readability, maintaining consistency to U.S. statutes, and returning focus to human rights issues rather than political bias."
Let me be clear: the changes to the yearly reporting undermine the U.S.'s credibility on human rights and affects other agencies, think-tanks, and researchers who rely on this data.
In three decades in and out of government, like many others working in foreign policy, defense and development, I relied heavily on the State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices (the report’s formal title). As a congressional staffer, I used it to brief members of Congress about human rights violations of allies and enemies alike. Later, I led a team of analysts assessing governance practices for countries receiving U.S. assistance. This information was a critical input to assessing a country’s vulnerability to conflict and the ability of its government to respond. In some cases, the government’s own practices were sources of grievance that fueled conflict.
In the classroom, I drew on this material to train graduate students to use the data in the Human Rights Report along with other research so they might do their own analysis and make recommendations for reform or conflict mitigation. These skills are required to support future diplomatic, military and development efforts around the world.
I mourn the loss of this resource and pity those who have to write “official” reports under these new guidelines for the Human Rights report.
On the other hand, maybe it’s time to jump on the America First Bandwagon.
Before reporting on the human rights practices of other countries, AMERICA FIRST should explore its policy of mass incarceration where we currently rank first in the world for people behind bars. Maybe AMERICA FIRST should explore rampant crony capitalism where access to power is bought and sold daily. And maybe AMERICA FIRST should fend off the gaslighting about election integrity and uncover who is responsible for widespread voter suppression efforts across the country.
That would be a human rights report worth reading.
RIP: USIP – But, wait a minute
DOGE meets the Rule of Law.
On May 19, in a 102-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell ruled that DOGE’s takeover of the U.S. Institute of Peace was “unlawful."
“The President second-guessed the judgment of Congress and President Reagan in creating USIP 40 years ago, and the judgment of every Congress since then, including in 2024, in appropriating funds to USIP, when he deemed this organization to be “unnecessary” three months ago in EO 14217. The President and his subordinates then used brute force and threats of criminal process to take over USIP’s headquarters, despite being cautioned that this organization did not fall within the Executive branch and its leadership was not subject to the President’s unilateral Executive branch removal power. This Administration then went even further, taking severe actions to dissemble USIP, including terminating its appointed Board members, its expert management, its dedicated staff and contractors located in both Washington, D.C. and around the world, and dispersing its assets and headquarters building. These actions against USIP were unlawful.”
The administration plans to appeal.
Heard in the X Bureau
The Acting Deputy for Air Defense and Gaming (A-D/ADG/X) has drafted a memo exploring the creation of an X Bureau airwing. Inspired by Qatar’s donation of a new Air Force One to the Department of Defense, projected to cost millions to retrofit for security and communication requirements, the X Bureau is looking for 12 X-wing fighters.
X Bureau morale is reportedly soaring. When asked for comment, an anonymous X Bureau source from a galaxy far, far away, texted DFX via Signal, “I used to bull's-eye womp rats in my T-16 back home.” May the farce be with you.
FROM THE BOOKSHELF
Reading: Community: The Structure of Belonging by Peter Block.
Book Clubs: Three Kings: Race, Class, and the Barrier Breaking Rivals Who Launched the Modern Olympic Age by Todd Balf (Review) and Prequel: An American Fight Against Fascism by Rachel Maddow.
Wholesale WWF style fabrications at every level of this administration. People believe what they want to believe.
Thanks for insight. As a outsider of the beltway, did not know this report existed. During the 50’s and 60’s, our government criticized other governments on human rights while back on the ranch we were denying African Americans basic rights and access to economic opportunities. Yes, things did get better but there is room for improvement.
Human rights or economic changes occur by example and not by criticizing others. What brought down Communism was not finger wagging at the Soviet Block countries, but people inside the countries who experienced life in the west and wanted the same rights and opportunities back home. Which is a very good argument for opening our borders to more visitors.
Returning to Vietnam to expel the French colonizers and emancipate his homeland, Ho Chi Minh looked to the United States, once a colony of the British, as a model—the Vietnamese Declaration of Independence is clearly modeled on the United States Declaration (from the web)