World politics feels like it is in disarray. Rules intended to regulate the behavior of all countries and institutions seem not to matter. International human rights norms now appear decidedly unfashionable, even in Australia, a country that should be one of the staunchest defenders of global human rights, where I have just spent two weeks meeting with government officials and civil society.
Transactional power politics increasingly disregard internationally agreed rules, enabling powerful governments, from China and Russia to the United States and their allies, to accelerate violations of human rights with few consequences.
But the longing for human rights is not going away. Respecting them remains critical for so many people around the world, especially those facing the most severe repression. In recent years, protesters throughout Asia – often led by young people – have fought for rights and equality in Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and India, even at the cost of their lives.
Democracies that remain committed to human rights and a rules-based world order should recognize that. Instead of cowering to this geopolitical moment, they should seize the uncertainty by doubling down and recognizing that rights are central to their long-term national interests. Canberra should be first in line.
Instead, Australia and other democracies have become focused on military security, diminishing the focus on human rights. In the past year, Australia has prioritized signing new regional defense and security agreements while doing little to re-energize a rules-based world order.
To be sure, military and cyber threats pose real dangers in this new world disorder. But coercion from abroad can take many forms. It also works by intimidating exiled dissidents, silencing journalists, corrupting democratic institutions, and exporting surveillance. Defense pacts alone cannot address these tactics.
Governments such as Australia’s need to recognize that defending civil society and a free press throughout the region and beyond are not luxuries but central to a democratic resurgence. Doing so means weaving human rights into domestic and foreign policies.
Australia should establish an Asia Democracy Fund together with other democratic governments to support embattled independent journalists, human rights defenders, and civil society organizations, particularly those already endangered or in exile, and groups that cannot safely access funding otherwise. Australia, like Canada, could also provide a safe haven to threatened rights defenders by establishing a special immigration pathway for them.
Australia should also support independent groups documenting serious abuses, particularly important at a time when the United States and other governments are attacking the international justice system. The country should stand up for the embattled International Criminal Court. It should also advance international justice by taking on some of the world’s worst atrocities in its own court system, a practice known as universal jurisdiction. Unfortunately, few countries in the Asia-Pacific region have been willing to use universal jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute alleged war criminals.
Issue by issue – from international crimes to technology to labor rights – Australia and other governments need to push back against increasing global repression. A comprehensive foreign policy approach in multilateral and bilateral forums is crucial, but so is adopting effective domestic laws and practices. This can include continuing to strengthen laws to prevent importing goods made with forced labor and stronger laws on privacy that regulate technology.
When governments that care about rights come together on the international stage to promote and protect them, and at the same time create laws and policies that demonstrate their own state won’t become a refuge for rights abusers, there is a much greater chance that together they can fend off the pressure being placed on human rights protections.
Rights-respecting democracies and like-minded allies need to find strength in numbers. They should create diplomatic and economic cover, to coalesce around key norms and tools, and international law more generally, while containing – and reversing – the damage done. A global alliance in support of a rules and rights-based international order can act in concert to protect the International Criminal Court or the United Nations’ independent fact-finding mechanisms, or the integrity of human rights treaties under attack. Australia is well positioned to present itself as a reliable leader and partner in this pursuit.
The international system that has been built over decades to protect and promote human rights has never worked perfectly or consistently. It has at times failed, at great cost to many people. But it has constrained abusive governments, given smaller and middle powers like Australia leverage to promote reform, reduced risks to marginalized populations by providing some level of global and regional stability, and offered victims of atrocities an opportunity for justice.
The rules-based order will not be saved by post-Cold War nostalgia, nor by international law that goes unenforced. It will survive and flourish only if democracies make human rights practical, a shared pursuit, and costly for others to violate. Australia, I came away believing, still has the standing to lead that effort.
