6 ms·

“Had a Case Yesterday”: India Raises Concerns About Human Rights in US

29 points by koolhead17 4y ago

allhypocrytes 4y ago
pasabagi 4y ago
One is reminded of Sir Roger Casement, who was knighted for his work in exposing and opposing human rights abuses in Peru, then hung for doing the same in the British Empire. Fighting for human rights in other countries has always been far easier and more profitable than doing the same in your own.
- simonh 4y ago
  He was hung for among other things recruiting Irish POWs to fight for the Germans during WW1.
- drumhead 4y ago
  He was hung for trying to get German aid for the Easter uprising in Ireland during WW1. Literally Treason.
  - pasabagi 4y ago
    Well, kinda. Apparently they dug up the original unpunctuated norman french text of the treason act, then read it so that it had a comma between two clauses, changing its sense, allowing him to be charged with treason: > or if a Man do levy War against our Lord the King in his Realm, or be adherent to the King’s Enemies in his Realm, giving to them Aid and Comfort in the Realm, or elsewhere, They also either forged or published a bunch of pretty saucy personal diaries, as a way to blacken his name.
    - cafard 4y ago
      It is generally accepted that they did not forge them.
      - pasabagi 4y ago
        To be honest, the only thing that interested me about the diaries was what it tells you about the home office, the character of the people trying to have Roger Casement hanged, and the integrity of the institution they served.
- Fatnino 4y ago
  Hanged. The past tense of execution by hanging is hanged, not hung.
eynsham 4y ago
That’s perfectly reasonable. Unfortunately, Jaishankar seems to think of this as revenge against the Americans. He shouldn’t. Commentary from abroad should never be regarded as a threat to sovereignty in a mature democracy; India has the right to comment on the US regardless of whether the South Block thinks that there has been some provocation previously, and vice versa.
- laxmin 4y ago
  Unfortunately, the human rights and religious freedom are weaponised by the US while the US itself does not, in fact, tolerate 'fact finding' missions and questionings undertaken by others. The US hosts the world's largest incarcerated population (disproportionately black), high crime rate, police brutality, systemic entrenched racism, corporate lobbying for favourable corporate taxations including the world's largest tax havens, etc etc while it disproportionately looks outwards towards countries.. especially India. THe US neither wants India to fail, but definitely does not want to succeed beyond a threshold - keeping India in a goldilocks range. Jaishankar's was not 'revenge' - it would be childish to think so. It is just pushback and getting a firmer grip against the US's weaponised human rights' as an issue. Two can speak the language - that is all. India had never interfered... nay, even commented in the internal affairs of the US. THis might soon change. We might be seeing 'Black lives matter' posters on the Indian Embassy, spokespersons talking about Gun control and gun violence in schools, right of women to safe abortion, rights of LGBTQI+ etc.
  - floor2 4y ago
    This is peak "whataboutism" and false-equivalences. All of the problems you've mentioned have some element of truth to them, but are also grossly exaggerated either by the activists working to address them (you have to make the problem sound really bad and really urgent to get attention) or by people just looking to attack the US or a specific politician, party, etc.
    - formerkrogemp 4y ago
      I don't think they're exaggerated. They're awful problems, and much reform is needed. However, I don't doubt that it's used to attack particular politicians, but the US isn't a "shining city upon a hill" providing the great example for all other countries to emulate. We have our own significant problems, and so long as we have them our moral grandstanding loses some of it's effect internationally.
legalcorrection 4y ago
If you don’t do what the US wants, they start to undermine the legitimacy of your regime with human rights talk. This is what happened here. India didn’t play ball on sanctions against Russia, and suddenly Blinken is talking about human rights abuses. Now India is just retorting.
- simonh 4y ago
  I'm sure you're right, but IMHO allegations of human rights abuses should always be given due weight regardless of the intentions of the accuser. What matters is whether the allegations are true, and that's all that matters, otherwise the debate simply degenerates into whataboutism.
  - resoluteteeth 4y ago
    Yes but the US also should take a consistent stance on human rights rather than only bringing them up when there is an ulterior motive, which will make other countries view them simply as a cudgel for enforcing us interests.
  - unmole 4y ago
    It would be much better if foreign countries didn't involve themselves in the internal affairs of sovereign nations.
    - lazide 4y ago
      So pretty much never going to happen unless said other sovereign nations make it painful for them.
    - simonh 4y ago
      I don't think that's reasonable. I don't think it's ok that North Korea systematically tortures huge numbers of people to death, or that huge numbers of Tutsis were slaughtered in Rwanda, or that for many decades South Africa systematically subjugated the majority of their population. Internal affairs can very quickly become international issues. Civil wars have a habit of spilling over borders, and refugee crises such as due to the situation in Syria affect nations on other continents. There are always knock-on effects. We should never have tolerated Russia's mercilessly brutal subjugation of Chechnya. We deplored their activities in Syria, but eh, Syria is far away. What they're doing in Ukraine is basically the same, but now it's in Europe so that's different. That's pure hypocrisy. There is a direct line to be drawn from what Russia did in Chechnya, joining the dots through Georgia, Syria and the Donbas directly to the attack on Kyiv. None of that should ever have been tolerable, but we did tolerate it. We should be kicking up a huge fuss over the treatment of the Uighurs, the minimal sanctions we're imposing now is the diplomatic equivalent of ineffectual hand wringing. It's tacit acceptance that this sort of behaviour is acceptable. After all, we are accepting it.
lizardactivist 4y ago
Very brave of India to come forward and say this. The whole world should join them and condemn the treatment of minorities in the U.S. and in the case of native Americans, the centuries long, drawn-out genocide.
pydry 4y ago
US condemnds Indian human rights because it's not on side with respect to Russia -> India condemns US in retaliation... Amazing how self serving most geopolitical moves are.
- anaganisk 4y ago
  Arent govt’s, what ever every model they run on communism, Democracy etc self serving? Show me one country, that puts its citizens first. Apart fro probably Vatican city. Every country lusts for power and money. Voters are just an after thought after corporations got their share.
spacemanmatt 4y ago
Filed under: conveniently-timed truth.
- unmole 4y ago
  Do you mean the US bringing up human rights in India because India refused to toe the line on Russia?
known 4y ago

29 points by koolhead17 4y ago

One is reminded of Sir Roger Casement, who was knighted for his work in exposing and opposing human rights abuses in Peru, then hung for doing the same in the British Empire. Fighting for human rights in other countries has always been far easier and more profitable than doing the same in your own.

simonh 4y ago
He was hung for among other things recruiting Irish POWs to fight for the Germans during WW1.
drumhead 4y ago
He was hung for trying to get German aid for the Easter uprising in Ireland during WW1. Literally Treason.
- pasabagi 4y ago
  Well, kinda. Apparently they dug up the original unpunctuated norman french text of the treason act, then read it so that it had a comma between two clauses, changing its sense, allowing him to be charged with treason: > or if a Man do levy War against our Lord the King in his Realm, or be adherent to the King’s Enemies in his Realm, giving to them Aid and Comfort in the Realm, or elsewhere, They also either forged or published a bunch of pretty saucy personal diaries, as a way to blacken his name.
  - cafard 4y ago
    It is generally accepted that they did not forge them.
    - pasabagi 4y ago
      To be honest, the only thing that interested me about the diaries was what it tells you about the home office, the character of the people trying to have Roger Casement hanged, and the integrity of the institution they served.
Fatnino 4y ago
Hanged. The past tense of execution by hanging is hanged, not hung.

eynsham 4y ago

That’s perfectly reasonable. Unfortunately, Jaishankar seems to think of this as revenge against the Americans. He shouldn’t. Commentary from abroad should never be regarded as a threat to sovereignty in a mature democracy; India has the right to comment on the US regardless of whether the South Block thinks that there has been some provocation previously, and vice versa.

laxmin 4y ago
Unfortunately, the human rights and religious freedom are weaponised by the US while the US itself does not, in fact, tolerate 'fact finding' missions and questionings undertaken by others. The US hosts the world's largest incarcerated population (disproportionately black), high crime rate, police brutality, systemic entrenched racism, corporate lobbying for favourable corporate taxations including the world's largest tax havens, etc etc while it disproportionately looks outwards towards countries.. especially India. THe US neither wants India to fail, but definitely does not want to succeed beyond a threshold - keeping India in a goldilocks range. Jaishankar's was not 'revenge' - it would be childish to think so. It is just pushback and getting a firmer grip against the US's weaponised human rights' as an issue. Two can speak the language - that is all. India had never interfered... nay, even commented in the internal affairs of the US. THis might soon change. We might be seeing 'Black lives matter' posters on the Indian Embassy, spokespersons talking about Gun control and gun violence in schools, right of women to safe abortion, rights of LGBTQI+ etc.
- floor2 4y ago
  This is peak "whataboutism" and false-equivalences. All of the problems you've mentioned have some element of truth to them, but are also grossly exaggerated either by the activists working to address them (you have to make the problem sound really bad and really urgent to get attention) or by people just looking to attack the US or a specific politician, party, etc.
  - formerkrogemp 4y ago
    I don't think they're exaggerated. They're awful problems, and much reform is needed. However, I don't doubt that it's used to attack particular politicians, but the US isn't a "shining city upon a hill" providing the great example for all other countries to emulate. We have our own significant problems, and so long as we have them our moral grandstanding loses some of it's effect internationally.

legalcorrection 4y ago

If you don’t do what the US wants, they start to undermine the legitimacy of your regime with human rights talk. This is what happened here. India didn’t play ball on sanctions against Russia, and suddenly Blinken is talking about human rights abuses. Now India is just retorting.

simonh 4y ago
I'm sure you're right, but IMHO allegations of human rights abuses should always be given due weight regardless of the intentions of the accuser. What matters is whether the allegations are true, and that's all that matters, otherwise the debate simply degenerates into whataboutism.
- resoluteteeth 4y ago
  Yes but the US also should take a consistent stance on human rights rather than only bringing them up when there is an ulterior motive, which will make other countries view them simply as a cudgel for enforcing us interests.
- unmole 4y ago
  It would be much better if foreign countries didn't involve themselves in the internal affairs of sovereign nations.
  - lazide 4y ago
    So pretty much never going to happen unless said other sovereign nations make it painful for them.
  - simonh 4y ago
    I don't think that's reasonable. I don't think it's ok that North Korea systematically tortures huge numbers of people to death, or that huge numbers of Tutsis were slaughtered in Rwanda, or that for many decades South Africa systematically subjugated the majority of their population. Internal affairs can very quickly become international issues. Civil wars have a habit of spilling over borders, and refugee crises such as due to the situation in Syria affect nations on other continents. There are always knock-on effects. We should never have tolerated Russia's mercilessly brutal subjugation of Chechnya. We deplored their activities in Syria, but eh, Syria is far away. What they're doing in Ukraine is basically the same, but now it's in Europe so that's different. That's pure hypocrisy. There is a direct line to be drawn from what Russia did in Chechnya, joining the dots through Georgia, Syria and the Donbas directly to the attack on Kyiv. None of that should ever have been tolerable, but we did tolerate it. We should be kicking up a huge fuss over the treatment of the Uighurs, the minimal sanctions we're imposing now is the diplomatic equivalent of ineffectual hand wringing. It's tacit acceptance that this sort of behaviour is acceptable. After all, we are accepting it.

lizardactivist 4y ago

Very brave of India to come forward and say this. The whole world should join them and condemn the treatment of minorities in the U.S. and in the case of native Americans, the centuries long, drawn-out genocide.

pydry 4y ago

US condemnds Indian human rights because it's not on side with respect to Russia -> India condemns US in retaliation... Amazing how self serving most geopolitical moves are.

anaganisk 4y ago
Arent govt’s, what ever every model they run on communism, Democracy etc self serving? Show me one country, that puts its citizens first. Apart fro probably Vatican city. Every country lusts for power and money. Voters are just an after thought after corporations got their share.

spacemanmatt 4y ago

Filed under: conveniently-timed truth.

unmole 4y ago
Do you mean the US bringing up human rights in India because India refused to toe the line on Russia?

known 4y ago