Now that the State Department Report on Human Rights Practices is out, the critics are weighing in.  Mark Weisbrot writes in the Guardian that “After Abu Ghraib, Gitmo and extraordinary renditions, other countries now challenge America’s standing on human rights.”  In his piece, “Who is America to Judge?,” Weisbrot writes:

Clearly, a state that is responsible for such high-profile torture and abuses as took place at Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo, that regularly killed civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq and that reserved for itself the right to kidnap people and send them to prisons in other countries to be tortured (“extraordinary rendition”) has a credibility problem on human rights issues.

In other words: Who are we to cast the first stone?  I suppose I don’t quite get his point.  The report speaks for itself.  Whether our own human rights record is spotless or horrible is not the issue.  The issue is whether the report is accurate.  If there exists inaccuracies in the report (which undoubtebly there are), those inaccuracies can be examined.  But the fact that America is imperfect is not a valid basis to reject the State Department’s conclusions.

One government that has been particularly sensitive to U.S. criticism is the People’s Republic of China.  After the 2008 Human Rights Report was released, the Chinese government issued a report of its own, discussing human rights in the United States.  The introductory section of the report reveals the report’s main purpose, which seems to be payback for the State Department’s negative comments on China:

The State Department of the United States released its Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2008 on February 25, 2009. As in previous years, the reports are full of accusations of the human rights situation in more than 190 countries and regions including China, but mentioned nothing of the widespread human rights abuses on its own territory. The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2008 is prepared to help people around the world understand the real situation of human rights in the United States, and as a reminder for the United States to reflect upon it s own issues.

The Chinese accusation of U.S. hypocricy rings hollow for several reasons.  First, the Chinese government has issued its human rights report about the United States, but not about any other country.  It seems, then, that the PRC is more concerned with retaliating against the U.S. than promoting human rights.  Second, the Chinese report demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the State Department Report.  The State Department reports on foreign governments, not on the internal situation in the United States.  We have other agencies to do that.  Indeed, much of the Chinese report is culled from United States government agencies that have issued reports on the domestic situation.  The premise of China’s report–that the U.S. criticizes others without looking inward–is simply wrong.  It’s just that the list of agencies that examine human rights inside the United States does not include the State Department.  Finally, the Chinese government has not responded to the substantive accusations in the DOS report.  Rather than examine its own substantial problems, the PRC government has tried to distract attention by shooting the messenger.  On one point, however, I agree with China: We in the United States would do well to reflect on our own human rights record.  Of course, given the myriad reports from different U.S. government agencies, we can do that very well without the help of the Chinese government.

Another government that has been critical of the DOS report is Ethiopia.  The Voice of America (which, by the way, is being jammed by the Ethiopian government) reports:

Ethiopia’s Prime Minister Meles Zenawi has blasted the latest U.S. State Department human rights report, saying it is full of lies and loopholes that expose its authors to ridicule…  The prime minister accused the State Department’s human rights investigators of sloppy work in compiling the 61-page annual report on Ethiopia.

As opposed to China, at least Mr. Meles has pointed to some alleged inaccuracies in the report: “one person listed in the report as ‘disappeared’ could easily have been found alive and well at his workplace,” said the Prime Minister.  “Acting US Ambassador to Ethiopia John Yates said experts had gone to great lengths to ensure the document’s accuracy, and rejected information that could not be verified.”  Having litigated over 100 asylum cases from Ethiopia, I’ve spent considerable time examining different sources on that country’s human rights record.  It’s not just the DOS that has criticized Ethiopia.  Even if there are inaccuracies in the report, my guess is that the report is closer to reality than Mr. Meles cares to admit.