Absurdity of US human rights argument
0 
More recently, Human Rights Watch, an organization based in New York, condemned China for its "human rights record". Among other incidents, it mentioned the Lhasa riots of 2008, saying Chinese troops used force to quell "peaceful protesters".
Some Western media outlets have condemned China without any concrete evidence but when it comes to the Wikileaks, the say more evidence is needed to confirm that US troops killed civilians. Is this the objectivity the Western media practices?
When humankind was suffering from the horrors of World War II, the US made significant contributions to improving human rights, both within and outside its borders. Even after peace returned, it helped establish the UN. But after becoming a superpower, it became drunk on its own image and started its perilous tour of self-aggrandizement, trampling human rights left, right and center.
Thanks to US President Barack Obama and his "smart power" strategy, the US projected a better image to the world for a while. But soon the "great nation" returned to unilateralism over human rights and other matters.
Just as several developing countries pointed out at the UN Human Rights Council, the Obama administration still relies more on words than actions on human rights. The present US administration has made little progress on human rights compared to its predecessors.
If the US hopes to regain its immediate post-World War II position on human rights, it has to give up its game of unilateralism and double standards. The Afghan War is an acid test for the Obama administration. And its human rights face depends on how it deals with its own human rights violations.
The author is a researcher with China Institute of International Studies.
