Dissident Dissonance
on April 30, 2007
The United States has applied a different standard on human rights and dissent to China than it did to the Soviet Union. Several things explain this. First, beginning in 1972, relations with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) were intended to serve U.S. interests in the Cold War. Second, after the Cold War rationale for this policy disappeared, Washington found a new rationale: engagement that would supposedly lead to political liberalization, absolving Washington of responsibility for an effective human rights policy. But Washington’s post-Cold War engagement with the PRC has not led to political liberalization. China’s growing economy and greater influence in world affairs make action to support dissent there more urgent, not less. The Soviet case provides an example of how international pressure and solidarity with dissidents and activists can undermine a one-party dictatorship.