Two U.S. Election Candidates from the Perspective of Human Rights Defenders

Is there any place for human rights in the recent U.S. presidential election? What do human rights defenders think about the two candidates in this year's U.S. election? Mahtab Vahidi Rad addresses such questions in this special program. Mansour Borji, a defender of religious minorities and spokesperson for Article 18 associated with the Council of Churches in London, sees little difference between the human rights positions of the two candidates: "Regarding the commitment of U.S. Democratic governments after Mr. Jimmy Carter, we have perhaps not witnessed sufficient concern for human rights. In Ms. Clinton's speeches during the debates, we do not see much evidence of attention to this area. But with Mr. Trump, the situation is different! Unfortunately, many of his values and orientations are in stark contrast to what I am sure many human rights activists emphasize, and his attention and commitment to that aspect are entirely questionable. Therefore, we do not see a suitable option for those who have human rights concerns between the two candidates." The U.S. has long been a critic of human rights conditions in Iran, both during the presidency of Barack Obama from the Democratic Party and earlier during George Bush's Republican presidency. Although some human rights defenders accuse Barack Obama of showing less attention to human rights in Iran after signing the nuclear agreement with Tehran. Hadi Ghaemi, director of the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran residing in New York, states: "During Barack Obama's first term, we saw special attention to the issue of human rights in Iran, especially with the establishment of a special rapporteur in the Human Rights Council, and the result was that member countries of this council, including the U.S., supported this rapporteur. This could be considered the peak of U.S. attention to human rights issues in Iran in recent years. Since then, especially since the start of nuclear negotiations, attention to human rights in Obama’s administration has decreased. It should be noted that now, as we see the final months of Barack Obama's second term, there is no special attention to this issue, and their main effort is to ensure that the next government continues the JCPOA." Some human rights defenders, including Hadi Ghaemi, believe that Hillary Clinton is more experienced in foreign policy compared to Donald Trump and will pay attention to human rights issues globally and specifically in Iran. Hadi Ghaemi: "I think Trump does not pay much attention to the issue of human rights in Iran. Because even regarding human rights in the U.S., he has shown signs that he wants to limit freedom of expression and resume the torture of various prisoners, and he praises the way Putin suppresses dissent in Russia. It seems that if he has no concern for human rights in the U.S., I do not think he will have it for Iran either. I believe Hillary Clinton has more experience and has been at the State Department for four years, and I suspect she will also consider human rights issues." Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, also considers Donald Trump's human rights positions "extremely concerning." He stated last month: "If Trump is elected president of the U.S. and does not change his approach in this regard, he will be a dangerous element for the world." Donald Trump had previously emphasized the revival of harsh methods and torture in interrogating terrorist suspects during his campaign, although he later retreated from some of his harsh positions. Nevertheless, Democrats, led by Hillary Clinton, the party's nominee, strongly criticize Trump's positions. Mahmoud Amiri Moghaddam, director of the Iran Human Rights Organization in Oslo, also has criticisms of Hillary Clinton, considering the Iraq War and the attack on Libya as a point of failure in her human rights record. Mahmoud Amiri Moghaddam: "Ms. Clinton was one of the advocates of the attack on Iraq, and we saw that it had a negative impact on human rights. I think it is difficult to say that Ms. Clinton will definitely be positive or negative, as it depends on the interests of the United States. Human rights is a key issue, and Ms. Clinton played an important role in the warmongering bombing of Libya. I think at that moment, Ms. Clinton did not consider the interests of the Libyan people. Therefore, I do not think we can expect much from either this president or that one to have a very positive or very negative impact on human rights. In the long term, good leaders for human rights are those who adhere to international mechanisms. So far, it seems that Ms. Clinton has more respect for UN conventions and the UN in general." Defenders of freedom of expression criticize Donald Trump's remarks about the media, including accusing the media of lying and bias, and consider these statements as poor indicators of his commitment to freedom of expression. However, Reza Moini, head of the Iran section at Reporters Without Borders in Paris, believes adherence to international covenants is more important than anything else. Reza Moini: "What we have seen over the past year, like other elections around the world and not just in the United States, is unfortunately a very bad atmosphere, especially from Mr. Trump, who has launched widespread attacks on journalists and freedom of information. However, traditionally, in the U.S., the set of rules before elections undergoes adjustments after elections. Some media operate within the framework of power, but what can be important is the deviation from principles and international covenants and, in the case of the U.S., from its Constitution and its main principle of freedom of expression, which can have devastating consequences not only for the United States but for the world as well." The state of freedom of expression, media freedom, and internet censorship in Iran and some other countries has also been a constant subject of criticism from the U.S. This issue has been addressed multiple times in the annual reports of the U.S. government. However, Reza Moini states that after the JCPOA, the U.S. has specifically paid less attention to the issue of freedom of expression in Iran: "Generally, after any agreement, not just the JCPOA, we see this approach in Western countries. One of the reasons for the regression of human rights in the world is linking it to the short-term policies and interests of these countries. This kind of blindness and regression effectively leads to a regression from the principles and foundations of human rights. It cannot advance a country in this area, but rather, with the regression of these countries, it creates an environment for further human rights violations and further violations of freedom of expression." Over the years, the U.S. government has repeatedly accused Iranian officials of human rights violations in its annual reports on the state of human rights in the world, criticizing the number of executions, the detention of journalists and civil activists, the condition of political and ideological prisoners, judicial processes, the situation of ethnic and religious minorities, and women's rights in Iran in its latest report in April of this year. However, Iranian officials have always labeled U.S. reports on the human rights situation in Iran as "political and unreliable" and stated that the U.S. itself is one of the "largest violators of human rights" in the world.