OBAMA FOR AMERICA

One of the last items discussed at the February 22nd meeting was a statement reported on CNN, NPR, the Washington Post and other formats made by Hillary Clinton in China on the balance of human rights policies and the need to further economic and national security development The group asked for a draft statement to be developed for possible transmittal to Secretary Clinton.

We are troubled by your statement in China on the balance between human rights and economic and security development. “But our pressing on those issues can't interfere with the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis, and the security crisis.” Be assured that our criticism is intended in friendship and respect, as constructive and in recognition of the decades of work you have done in the field of human rights. In parsing the words you chose, there is fear that they might mean that while human rights will continue to be in the discussion, it is no longer a leg of the stool; in other words, that this administration won’t pursue human rights and economic prosperity on equal time. We just lived through eight years of an administration whose distain for human rights caused the world’s opinion of America to tumble. For us, the Obama election was about correcting this image, which also means reversing an even longer history of our pushing human rights aside for other priorities, especially in the Cold War when national security came before rights. We believe that America must stand for more than that. Whether it is in the treatment of entire national populations, remote ethnic groups or prisoners of any origin, we need to make our friends and competitors understand that there are indeed limits which if crossed do deter economic collaboration. It does us no good to live in a world of economic stability and growth when human rights are not also allowed to flourish, for only then can man reach its full potential. What we are asking for is a clear clarification of your statement that certifies that we are on a new road when the development of human rights, economics and security are equal, none a second cousin to the other. American can and must do both, especially now.

CNN reported the actual statement, with analysis; though one reporter reviewing CNN's statement said that the statement might have been taken out of context; however, the Washington Post did report the same statement on February 25, as one which was protested against by human right groups. NPR aired interviews as well by human right experts who complained about the statement.

Comment by Roy Hayes: In view of the analysis of the CNN’s Statement, I think it may be more appropriate to ask CNN to clarify what CNN reported. If we are going to send a statement to Secretary Clinton, maybe we should restate President Obama position and ask her to reaffirm that this is still the position of the Obama Administration. I don’t think we want or expect Secretary Clinton constantly responding to individual new reports, which often reports statements out-of-context. I think as a Foreign Policy Group, when we see the press misrepresent a statement, we should write their Editors and hold the press accountable, just as we hold our political leaders accountable. I think most people get their information through the press, and freedom of the press is a right we all cherish. As a Group, we need the let the press know that we will hold them accountable and sound bites that mislead the Public are unacceptable. That’s my two cents.

Comment by Basant Farag: Who brought us an analysis by on Feb 22 by Jeff McMahon, Environmental News Examiner who said " In case you haven't seen the quotes, here they are again. When it quoted Hillary Clinton on human rights, CNN excised her words from a longer quote that Reuters ran in full. CNN deployed the partial, stitched-together quote out of context to assert that the new U.S. Secretary of State cares more about economy, climate change, and security than she does about human rights. CNN "Human rights cannot interfere with the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crises." Reuters: "Now, that doesn't mean that questions of Taiwan, Tibet, human rights, the whole range of challenges that we often engage on with the Chinese, are not part of the agenda. But we pretty much know what they are going to say. We have to continue to press them but our pressing on those issues can't interfere with the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crises. We have to have a dialog that leads to an understanding and cooperation on each of those." Analysis by McMahon:

When you read the quote in context, it becomes clear that Clinton was not saying, as CNN asserted, that "the world economic and other crises are more pressing and immediate priorities." Rather, she was saying, as Reuters put it, that "The United States will press China on human rights but this will not keep them from working together on the financial crisis, climate change and North Korea." The difference in reporting is trivial only if you consider the economic and climate crises trivial, only if you think it's no big deal that North Korea has nuclear weapons. Because while it's crucial that Chinese and Tibetan people enjoy basic freedom and security, it's also crucial that we work with China on the economy, the environment, and peace. China holds $700 billion in U.S. Treasury bills—an amount almost as large as the economic stimulus package President Obama signed this month. Should we refuse to talk to them about the economy? Climate scientists believe China surp assed the U.S. as the world's leading producer of greenhouse gases in 2007 and that China's contribution to global warming is increasing ten times faster than ours. How can we stop China from roasting the planet if we refuse to talk to them about the environment? We may be defining the phrase "human rights" too narrowly. When Clinton talks to the Chinese about the economy she's talking to the Chinese about human sustenance across the globe. When she talks to the Chinese about the environment and nuclear security, she's talking to them about human existence and the existence of many other species. Unfortunately, when she talks about anything, some reporters feel free to take liberties with what she says. Like Tom Cruise, like Britney Spears, Hillary Clinton has achieved a version of celebrity that eclipses her right to have her statements reproduced faithfully, and in context, by the press. It also eclipses our right to have them delivered faithfully and in context. That's not the way the press should operate, but ever since Hillary Clinton said she's not going to stand by her man like a little woman in a Tammy Wynette song, ever since she made it clear she's not going to stay home and bake cookies, some reporters have listened to her words not for their meaning, but only for their temperature. And with Clinton heading the State Department, she won't be the only one shortchanged. CNN's hatchet reporting makes for good headlines, strong page views, angry activists, and discuss ions that echo around the globe--but it makes it harder for us to save and create jobs, stop global warming, and live in peace. News Analysis by Jeff McMahon

Radio Netherlands: Reported Mrs Clinton's declaration that she would not allow US concerns about human rights in China to get in the way of joint work on the global economy, climate change and security issues, angered human rights activists, who saw her visit as an opportunity squandered. Amnesty International said it was "shocked and extremely disappointed". Zeng Jinyan, one of China's best-known dissidents, who was confined to her home by police during Mrs Clinton's visit said: "Chinese human rights defenders and civil society will suffer even more if the international community does not pay enough attention and (place) enough pressure on China."

The Washington Post reported on February 23rd that Clinton's comments have stirred outrage in the human rights community

National Public Radio (NPR) on February 21 reported that On her first overseas tour as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton said that U.S. objections to China's human rights record should take a backseat to more pressing economic issues. Human Rights Watch Asia spokesperson Sophie Richardson reacts to those remarks. Richardson's comments were angry.