|
Globalization and Human Solidarity by Tissa Balasuriya Fr. Tissa Balasuriya from Sri Lanka is a leading spokesperson of Third World Theologies. He is the Director of the Centre of Society and Religion in Sri Lanka. He is the author of numerous books, including Eucharist and Human Liberation, Planetory Theology, and Mary and the Human Liberation. Published by Christiava Sahitya Samithy, Tiruvalla 689 101, Kerala, S. India, November 2000. Used by permission of the publisher. This material was prepared for Religion Online by Ted & Winnie Brock.
Chapter 7: Human Rights Within World Apartheid Universal
Declaration of Human Rights The
Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 agreed to by the nations of the
world under the aegis of the UNO is perhaps the most important document of
human rights that the peoples of the world have agreed on. It is therefore most
helpful in the struggle for the understanding and implementation of human rights
in different situations in the world. It has also been a guideline for the
drafting of constitutions of nations when they achieved freedom. Some of its
articles such as on torture and on freedom of expression (Article 19) have been
signposts in the peoples struggle for human rights during the last half
century. All the same it is necessary to see also
the limits of this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as it depended on the
persons and groups that drafted it in the aftermath of World War II and the victory
of Allied Nations. In an analysis of human rights one has to examine who is it
that defines these rights, and whom do they benefit. The understanding of human
rights tend to be generally dependent on the self-interest of those who
articulate the right and struggle for them. This is seen in the long neglect of
women’s rights in a male dominated world. Since it maybe difficult to agree on any
single concept or code of human rights, valid and binding on all, we shall
reflect on the 1948 UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UD) in relation
to globalization. It incorporates the social, economic and cultural rights
alongside the civil and political rights. This was a definite advance in the
thinking on human rights even though it is within a particular perspective of
the power relations of the time after World War II. In order to have a framework of reference
we shall comment on the rights enshrined in the declaration, while noting some
aspects in which it needs further development especially to meet the
aspirations of the poor victims of the poor countries. I am not arguing from an
ideological or theological point of view except on the understanding expressed
in article 1 that all humans are equal in dignity and rights and “should act
towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood”, and that the whole earth is
meant for all humans. The Universal Declaration is de facto
based on i) the acceptance of the sovereignty of
nation states as then constituted, ii) on a rather individualistic
understanding of human rights. It did not provide for an effective balance of
rights as between freedom and equality, between individuals and society, for
human rights to be meaningful. iii) It did not have specific arrangements
for the enforcement of these rights. It is a document on rights and not one on
obligations for respecting such rights. iv) The UD is designed to protect citizens
against violations of human rights by States and governments, even if
ineffectively. It does not take into consideration the other, and perhaps now
more important, violators of human rights viz, the transnational corporations
and finance houses. Human Rights within World Apartheid
A basic factor englobing the entire issue
of human rights is that, de facto, it takes place within the prevailing world
order which is one of world apartheid. Apartheid is a system or social order in
which there is an imposition of superiority of one group over others, as of the
white race over the blacks in South Africa. The whites took the best lands, had
the best jobs and higher incomes and civil and political rights in that state.
This was defended not only by political and economic power but also by
theological claims of divine election. I described this situation in the 1970s
and 1980s. “There is
almost universal disapproval of the policy of apartheid-separation of the
races-followed by South Africa. Few stop to think, however, that the whole
world system is based on a sort of apartheid. Each nation state is confined to
its present territorial limits and expected to develop within them. The
different racial groupings of the one human race are allotted separate
preserves m which they have to live. The yellow peoples have China, Japan and
the adjacent lands. The blacks have Africa. The brown peoples are alloted
India, Pakistan and South East Asia. The Arabs have North Africa and the Middle
East. The rest of the world Europe, North Central and South America, Australia,
New Zealand, South Africa and USSR-is largely reserved for the whites. When
black, yellow and brown peoples have been free to migrate, it has generally
been as slaves or as cheap labour for whites-for example, blacks in the
Americas, Indians in Malaysia, Sri Lanka and West Indies, Koreans in
Japan.”(Tissa Balasuriya: “Planetary Theology”, Orbis NY, 1984 pp.
28-29) The fall of the Soviet empire in 1989 did
not change this aspect of racial apartheid. It is within this apartheid that
economic globalization and the decisions on human rights are taking place. It is
noteworthy that hardly any writers on globalization and human rights, whatever
their ideology, accentuate this basic reality of the world distribution of land
among the races. This apartheid is the result of the
colonial expansion of the Western peoples, including Russia, during the period
from 1492 till 1945. During these centuries enormous resources including gold
and silver were transported from the colonies to the colonizing nations. This
helped in the development of western capitalism and in building their economic
power base. The present growth of capitalist globalization is the continuation
of the economic and sociocultural order built up by that earlier global
transformation under Western military and colonial domination. This is the
most fundamental reality of the world order, a result of the conquests, plunder
and genocide of centuries of imperialism. It is grossly unjust, though it is
now legitimized under the prevailing positive international law and the United
Nations Organization set up by the victors of World War II after 1945. The events of the 20th century did not
change this situation of world apartheid. Neither the decolonization of the
post-war era, nor the collapse of the Soviet Union changed the distribution of
land among the world’s racial groupings. The situation in South Africa changed
after the transfer of power to the majority blacks in 1994. But where the
whites had settled as the majority their domination continues, with the native
and black peoples having greater say in the countries of South and Central
America. Is 2000 not the map of the world according to racial distribution of
population to land roughly the same as in 1900? Now this is further
consolidated as the UNO is legally empowered to preserve this status quo, and
the TNCs take over lands and resources of the poor peoples for the benefit
mainly of the rich in the rich countries. All our discussions of human rights, of
globalization, of justice and of world peace have to be within this racist
framework of the world system or global disorder. But the influence of the
cultural conditioning by this system is such that most universities and
educational systems and even international lawyers, ethicists and moral
theologians do not consider this aspect of the world injustice. “As long as the
nation-states maintain their present boundaries, it is unlikely that a just
world order can be realized. In fact the growing pressures on the land in the
poor countries are likely to lead to phenomenal political explosions that could
ultimately overthrow the world territorial structures. We are perhaps at a
stage in world history, as in the fourth, fifth, sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries, when there will be mass movements across countries and
continents.”(Tissa Balasuriya: op. cit. pp. 29-30) In these perspectives the entire rhetoric
of the world justice, human rights, peace, debt payment and aid has to be
re-thought. There has to be a deconstruction of the dialogue on development,
human rights and international law and justice. But since the rich powers and
their academia and media condition the cultural framework of thinking on such
issues, the just interests of the poor are not taken into account in the
discussion among the rich as at the summit conferences of the G 8. They are not
highlighted even in the discourse among the governments of the poor peoples as
in the Non-Aligned Movement. The ideology or philosophy of
capitalistic globalization is within the parameters of this world apartheid.
Thus the idea of the “free market” does not operate in relation to people and
land. There is no free mobility of people to the free and unused lands of the
world. In this regard there is no invisible hand that brings about equilibrium
between supply and demand. On the contrary it is the visible force and
migration laws of the superpowers that keep the land hungry persons from the
empty space of the world occupied in the days of colonial expansion. While appreciating the immense value of
the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights we must work for its
amplification to include global racial justice, in relation to population and
land and resources. This will undoubtedly be part of the demanding and
troublesome human agenda in the next few decades. Equality and
Freedom Article 1. “all
human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed
with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of
brotherhood”. “Art. 2. Everyone
is entitled to all the rights and freedoms of this Declaration without
distinction of any kind such as race, colour, sex, language, religion,
political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other
status”. These two articles can be taken as the
philosophical basis or assumptions on which the other rights are posited. Endowment
with reason and conscience, and hence that a human person is a rational and
moral being, is commonly accepted by all peoples, whatever their philosophy,
ideology or religion. Hence she/he is different from other beings on earth and
therefore entitled to certain rights and freedoms which others not enjoy. That all should act towards one another
in a spirit of brotherhood (sic) is another moral norm that is acceptable to
persons and peoples is a demand of secular humanism as well as of all the major
world religions. It recalls the teaching “do unto others as you would like
others to do unto you”. Thus a basis has been agreed upon that does not need to
posit a transcendent authority or a religious organization to legitimize it.
This implies the acceptance of obligations on which the right of others are
based. The Declaration comes back to these in articles 29 and 30. These are valuable affirmations of the
basic rights and a desire for their being respected, but do not take into account
the actual inequalities in the real world that negate their realization. The
declaration of the right to equality of rights and to non-discrimination is an
advance. But globalization brings about a situation in which everyone and
everything, including health and education, have a price. The wealthy, powerful
and well educated have the money to pay the price required and the means and
the connections to assert their rights and maintain their dignity more fully.
The difference in wealth and incomes worsened by globalization often makes the
realization of these rights even worse in the present world. Civil and
Political Rights, Articles 3-21 “Art.3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. This is the first cornerstone of the Declaration.
It introduces articles 4-21 in which other civil and political rights are set
out. In so far as poverty increases for many in the world, the right to
property is less meaningful for the have-nots. This right means that the rich
have a protection of the right to their property, that increases absolutely and
relatively with globalization. Such trends lead to social conflicts that bring
about societal violence and wars. This in turn brings about a restriction
of the rights to life, liberty and security. The conditions of living have
become worse for many more people during the recent decades of neo-liberal
globalization. About 1,300,000,000 out of the worlds population of near
6,000,000,000 live on less than $1 per day. Some 800 million persons suffer from
hunger and malnutrition. 15 million babies die each year of hunger and
illnesses. The documentation of the UNDP, FAQ bear witness to this worsening
situation.(“But the improvements in child nutritional status in the 1970s
ceased, on average, in the 1980s. Some 100 million children under the age of
five show protein energy malnutrition, more than 10 million suffer from the
severe from that is normally fatal if not treated. “Global Outlook 2000”;
United Nations Publications 1990; p.292.) “Human Rights: Contemporary Forms of
Slavery’ United Nations Fact Sheet 14, 1995 The poisoning of the
food due to use of dangerous chemicals is increasing the proneness to sickness
even among the rich. Dictatorship that deny human rights such
as to life and security have been more pronounced in the poor countries during
the post World War II period. The rich countries, that favour globalization,
have been supportive of almost all the right wing dictators of the past few
decades, at least till they were about to fall due to popular discontent. The
conditions of the National Security State continue even under democratic forms
of government. The poor countries become virtually ungovernable when the social
inequalities and unemployment increase. “Art 4. No one
shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be
prohibited in all its forms.” The modern world has it forms of slavery
that can be very damaging to human dignity and livelihood. 100 million children
are exploited for their labour according to a recent estimate by the
International Labour Organization (ILO),(“Human Rights: Contemporary Forms of
Slavery’ United Nations Fact Sheet 14, 1995 , p.1.) The poisoning of
the food due to use of dangerous chemicals is increasing the proneness to
sickness even among the rich. Entire nations can be in bondage due to the
servitude to foreign debt. The enforcement of IMF/WB determined Structural
Adjustment Policies can make the peoples of the poor indebted countries as wage
slaves of the foreign companies, virtually from birth. The increase of poverty
leads to more prostitution of women and children including boys. Sometimes they
are taken away through an international ring of exploiters of the sex trade.
Tourism, which is a major industry with globalization, also leads to more
prostitution and child abuse. Unemployment enables employers and
governments to reduce the rights of workers, restrict trade union rights
especially in the free trade zones in the poor countries. The treatment of
foreign migrant workers may be likened to a form of bonded labour. The millions
of refugees due to civil conflicts live in conditions even worse than slavery.
Though formal slavery is abolished the conditions of the poor are similar to
forms of slavery. Rights
5-12 deal with the civil rights of everyone - not to be
subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
(art.5) - to recognition as a person before the law
(art.6) - to equality before the law, (art.7) - effective legal
remedy to violation offundamental rights (art.8) - against arbitrary arrest, detention or
exile (art 9) - fair trial and presumption of innocence
until proved guilty (art. 10,11) -
to privacy (art.12). These are positive advances in the
background of large scale violations of human rights in periods of human
history. The declaration of these rights have influenced the elaboration of
fundamental rights in many post-war constitutions of State. They have been of
immense help in the struggle against dictatorship and in the promotion of
democracy. The development of communications has helped build world wide
movements for the defence of human rights as against torture and inhuman
treatment. On the otherhand the control over communications itself has enabled
the powerful to bring pressure on the poor and weak. Worsening social and economic conditions
due to globalization increase crime, violence and civil conflicts. With these
there is the likelihood of more repression in societies. The means of
psychological torture have also increased due to the increased powers of
surveillance over people. The equality before the law before
considerably for its affectivity on the ability to obtain the services of
lawyers who have generally to be paid by the clients. The poor are adversely
affected due to their inequality before the lawyers. The affluent have
therefore more opportunities of evading the rigour of the law. In fact most of
those who are in prisons or are exiles or refugees are the poor and
marginalized. Since globalization increases inequality in society, it worsens
the situation for the protection of the human rights of the poor. |