Human rights in China and the United States: Competing visions and discrepant performances

It is difficult to explain this "sweet and sour" quality of Sino-American relations in terms of what China or the United States did. After all, the breakthrough in Sino-American rapprochement occurred in the wake of some of the worst violations of basic human rights in China when literally millions of people were persecuted and an untold number killed during the so-called Cultural Revolution. These atrocities did not deter Washington from seeking detente with Beijing and a united front to contain Moscow. Nor did the fact that the United States (US) was fighting a war against China's communist ally stop Beijing from pursuing this rapprochement. Since 1972, the US had disengaged from Vietnam and the economic conditions and social freedoms, if not political rights, of the Chinese people had improved immensely as a result of the reforms launched under Deng Xiaoping. Yet tension between the two countries has mounted rather than abated. How could this be? Some people may point to the changes in the international balance of forces. The disintegration of the Soviet Union enabled uncontested US hegemony, making China's partnership dispensable and changing Beijing's status (along with Baghdad and Belgrade) to a candidate for Washington's "substitute enemies." Others may refer to more profound and enduring differences in the Chinese and American political economy and political culture-in what they are or think or see themselves to be. These differences are not haphazard or ephemeral. Rather they are the defining characteristics of these systems. They form integral elements of their self-image and professed ideology, and constitute the core institutions of their respective societies. They are persistent and deeply entrenched. While submerged during periods of cordiality, they re-emerge as points of contention during downturns in Sino-American relations. When expressed as the uncompromising ideals of Maoist egalitarianism or American individualism, the divergent views and values motivate competitive attempts to seize the moral high-ground in campaigns more designed to score rhetorical points than to affect actual behavior.