Resistance to populism is possible, praising the political “counter-attack” or by mass movements in the world under the impact of Donald Trump’s election last year, without forgetting the ongoing crises in Yemen, Human Rights Watch said in its annual report.
“A year ago, while Donald Trump was entering the White House,” he said in an interview with Agence France-Presse. “We were in a state of despair.” “We had the impression that the tyrannical populace was at their peak and we could do nothing to stop them.”
While its background document, which reviews the situation in 90 countries, paints a grim picture of the human rights abuses it has observed worldwide, this year the NGO chose to focus on areas of optimism.
“Political leaders willing to fight for human rights principles have shown they can put an end to authoritarian populist plans,” Human Rights Watch said in a statement. “When these leaders combined with the movements of the masses and active actors from several backgrounds, they proved that the rise of anti-rights governments is not inevitable,” she said.
Trump’s victory in the presidency was a bad news last year in the eyes of the organization, but in its annual report of 2018, the victory of his French counterpart Emmanuel Macaron was “the clearest example of the success of populist resistance.”
“He actually fought his campaign for democracy and won a big victory, but a much less tolerant and less competitive competition,” said Kenneth Roth, referring to far-right candidate Marin Loben. Although the authors of the report saw “his first months in office showing a mixed record (…) with his anti-terrorism policies and his silent visit to China with cause for concern.”
– “Mass atrocities” –
Human Rights Watch said that “in central Europe, authoritarian populist governments also faced resistance” as well as from the European Union. Particularly mentioned Poland and Hungary.
The report said the mobilization of the street against “the efforts of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro aimed at emptying democracy of its content in Venezuela.” He also spoke about “The March of Women in the United States” which turned out to be “a global phenomenon in support of women’s rights (…) even before the # I movement also” against sexual harassment.
On the United States, Roth expressed his satisfaction with “the wave of resistance by judges, political leaders and citizen groups as well as public opinion.”
Trump “caused a lot of damage, but it has been contained, especially in his efforts to prevent Muslims from entering the United States and to reduce the health insurance program” or even “to prevent transsexuals from serving in the US military,” he said.
But the report is not limited to good news. “Some of the major forces we tended to rely on to promote human rights disappeared,” said Kenneth Roth.
“It is one of the main negative consequences of the Trump administration, which is absent from this front unless it is to condemn its” arch-enemies “such as Iran and Venezuela. He mentioned Britain, which is now “preoccupied with the BRICEST,” which prevents it from playing a key role in this field.
“The retreat of governments that might defend human rights, including the United States, the United Kingdom, which is preoccupied with its exit from the European Union, and the European countries that deal with the influence of the xenophobic populists,” Roth said in a statement.
“The reluctance of these countries is behind a vacuum in which mass atrocities, often without censorship, have spread in countries such as Yemen, Syria, Burma and southern Sudan,” she said.
“Many small and medium-sized countries have jumped to the fore,” she said, such as the Netherlands, Liechtenstein and Iceland, and “made a difference” by moving on some of the crisis areas.
The organization expressed regret that in Austria and the Netherlands “the leaders of the center-right parties have been competing by adopting xenophobic attitudes, attacking migrants and Muslims, and thus spreading abusive populist policies.”
From this contrasting picture, Roth draws a “lesson” that “there is a battle going on” against populism and that it is “a battle worth fighting.”
