Australia must stand again for human rights

Randall Doyle says rising global unrest will require a principled and moral stand

HUMAN rights have been a prominent part of US foreign policy since the 1970s. Four decades later, they are the elephant in the room.

Australia has been an enthusiastic supporter of human rights. After World War II, victorious nations were busy putting the world back together. The US pushed a new global confederation, the United Nations and 50 nations signed on.

The most important addendum to the UN Charter was the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This historic document was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948 in Paris. Few attendees at this UN session understood how profound this document would become in global affairs.

Human rights are increasingly demanded by citizens globally, but their progress is incremental.

One person who grasped the importance of this new philosophy was Herbert Vere Evatt, a brilliant jurist and controversial Australian statesman. In his tenure as the third UN President of the General Assembly (19481949), he played a vital role drafting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Evatt has been lost in the pages of history but from 1945 to 1948 he represented the best of Australian society.

Even his legion of critics later acknowledged Evatt’s role at the UN conference in 1945, and three years later at Paris, made Australia proud.

A small military power, a former British colony, a lightly populated nation on the edge of the world’s most populated continent was at the table with major powers, pushing for a global vision for humanity. In retrospect, it was amazing. Ex-PM Malcolm Fraser wrote a tribute to Evatt in Dangerous Allies: “Australia’s post-war leaders also appreciated that Australia had to carve a role out for itself in the broader new world world that was forming from the ashes of the old. From the dying days of the League of Nations through to the foundation of the United Nations Organisation, Dr Herbert Vere Evatt was an internationalist who believed devoutly in an independent Australia. Evatt believed that only Australia was in the best position to argue for Australia’s interests.”

Australia may again become the new standard bearer for human rights in the world. Why? Hugh White, professor of strategic studies at the Australian National University, has authored two game-changing essays about Australia’s new geopolitical challenges. His writing has been intellectually forceful.

Australia will be forced to make another commitment. Like Evatt, Australia will again be looked on to carry the flag for universal human rights.

President Donald Trump and former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson have made it clear they have no use for human rights. Former US President Obama also backed away from them at the end of his presidency, particularly in speeches about China. Obama omitted human rights from his addresses.

With Obama and Trump kowtowing to China’s antihuman rights position due to its growing economic and military power, human rights in the region will fall to Australia. In January, Australia took its place on the UN Human Rights Council. Foreign Minister Julie Bishop noted with pride that Australia had received 176 votes from the General Assembly. In December, she mentioned in an interview with the Lowy Institute that Australia’s commitment to human rights began 70 years ago with the passage of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Australia’s stance on human rights will be critical in a world that appears to be unravelling. Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, almost 95 years old, has said he has never seen global affairs so unsettled. He notes that communication technologies have expanded the reach of an average person and expedited the velocity of disruptive forces in the world.

When global turbulence reaches the shores of any country, their ability to survive will depend on their cultural beliefs, national interests and moral principles. It is the moment a nation asks itself, “Who are we?”

Australia will not succumb to political expediency because at that critical moment it will know what it stands for — human rights.