General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDoes the world have a fundamental duty to save others from human rights abuses?
Serious question. NK in particular has got me thinking about this issue. You can't say yes to the above question, while also seeking a totally passive approach to foreign policy. Nicely asking the brutal dictators of the world to respect the human rights of their citizens will only go so far. At what point does the civilized world have an obligation to step in and put a stop to the abuses? Is it a matter of scale? NK are guilty of human rights abuses on par with the Nazis and Imperial Japanese. The only difference is in the scale. Should there be some arbitrary scale guidelines on when international intervention is appropriate?
Personally I think it would be doing the citizens of NK a great favor to save them from the brutal and delusional Kim family. Some might die in a war, but their current existence is really no way to live life. I'd personally rather fight and die than live in similar conditions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_North_Korea
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2016/country-chapters/north-korea
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/north-korea
Jim__
(14,077 posts)I believe the world has an obligation to do what it can to make life better for these people. How can we go about that? My understanding is that the people of NK are frequently hungry - often on the verge of starving. We should try to work with the government of NK to ease these conditions - maybe ship food into NK and insure that it is distributed to the people. We may also be able to offer the government incentives to grant some freedom and improve the living conditions of its people. Incentive like beneficial trade deals, sharing technology, etc. Of course, we consider the government dangerous, so we have to be careful about what capabilities we give them.
I doubt we have the capacity to save the people of NK. I doubt that invading NK or dropping bombs on it is likely to save the people.
We should help the people as much as we can. We should exercise great care that we dont make their condition worse. We also have to be aware of any potential consequences our actions may have for people other than the citizens of NK - e.g. NK may well have the capability of killing large numbers of South Koreans very quickly if it is under attack..
Calculating
(2,955 posts)That's already why the people are starving. Their leadership spends virtually all of their GDP on developing weapons to threaten their neighbors with.
Jim__
(14,077 posts)That was before NK had a nuclear weapon, and, presumably, had the Republican congress agreed to the details, and Bush respected the deal, NK would not have a nuclear weapon today. So, history shows us that we can negotiate with NK and reach agreement with respect to weapons development and make real progress toward a peaceful resolution of our disagreements.
alarimer
(16,245 posts)There should be a universal standard of human rights: free speech, equality of sexes, no discrimination on the basis of race or religion, etc, humane treatment at all times, even for the imprisoned and even during war.
Enforcing it is another issue.