'Encouraging Asian democracies to respect religious freedom', Benedict Rogers

There is so much that countries like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan can and should do, together with others

Yesterday in Tokyo, an eclectic mix of about 200 people from across the region and the globe gathered in one room. They included Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and Shintoists.

There were politicians, diplomats, journalists, lawyers, academics, human rights activists, theologians, missionaries and religious clerics from across Asia, the United States (US) and Europe.

What was this extraordinary exercise in diversity? An experiment in syncretism? No: it was another step forward in building a movement to change the world.

The second annual Asia Region International Religious Freedom (IRF) summit was convened by Sam Brownback, a Republican and former US ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom, and Dr. Katrina Lantos Swett, a Democrat and former chair of the US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF).

Given the polarization in American politics today, the mere fact that the summit’s co-chairs stood united in determination to defend freedom of religion or belief around the globe, is something of a miracle.

Add to that the diversity of religions and cultures at the gathering. As Brownback said in his opening remarks, “The international religious freedom movement is a salad that’s never been put together before.”

But then — and here’s the important point — he emphasized: “This meeting is not about religion...”

An interesting comment, delivered to a roomful of religious people.

“…it’s about a common human right. It’s about Article 18 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights from 1948, which I believe is the most abused and neglected of all the human rights, globally,” Brownback explained.

“I also believe this is the most important human rights movement on the planet,” he added.

Given that 80 percent of the world’s population claims a faith of some kind, if we protect the right for people to practice their faith anywhere in the world, freely, without persecution, and peacefully, “you have got an army behind you,” said Brownback.

And given that 60 percent of the world’s population lives in Asia, and the region contains several key persecution hotspots, it is a critical focus for the international religious freedom movement today.

“The healthiest societies,” Dr. Lantos Swett said, “are those where people of all beliefs and none are protected, are treated with respect, have an equal place at the table, but have some table manners.”

The program of the day took us through sessions that addressed questions of pluralism, stability and growth; religious freedom within democracy; and the impact of genocide.

Asia is currently witnessing at least two recognized genocides — the Uyghurs in China and the Rohingyas in Myanmar, both Muslim populations — and, arguably, several others.

Brownback accused China of committing three genocides simultaneously: of the Uyghurs, the Tibetan Buddhists and Falun Gong practitioners.

I had the privilege of chairing a panel on freedom of religion or belief under authoritarian regimes. We discussed five of the world’s most brutal, repressive regimes, all within Asia: China, Vietnam, Laos, North Korea, and Myanmar.

Asia includes four of the world’s five remaining Communist regimes — China, Vietnam, Laos, and North Korea — and one of its most illegal military juntas, the one that seized power in a coup in Myanmar in 2021.

In this context, the Vatican’s approach featured as a particular concern, and Professor Saho Matsumoto of Nihon University, an expert on Vatican policy, set out the controversies regarding Pope Francis’ deal with China over the appointment of bishops.

The Vatican’s compromises with Vietnam, the pope’s silence on North Korea’s human rights crisis and his expressed desire to visit Pyongyang were also explored as points of contention. Yet the pope’s solidarity with Myanmar and specifically the Rohingyas was highlighted as a positive expression of his moral authority.

Towards the end of the day, I had the opportunity to ask former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo how we could hold Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) regime to account, not only for the Uyghur genocide but also for the atrocity crimes perpetrated against Tibetans, Falun Gong practitioners, Christians across China and the dismantling of Hong Kong’s freedoms.

And I also asked him how we could free my friend Jimmy Lai.

His reply was refreshingly honest, both about the scale of the challenge and the failures of the free world so far.

The CCP, he acknowledged, runs “a surveillance state that would make the Nazis blush, or would make the Stasi blush. It’s a surveillance state like none in the recorded history of man.”

Then, looking me straight in the eye, on Hong Kong he said: “I am often asked what was one of your greatest failures — and that’s it … We could have done better — we collectively, the United States, Britain, others, we could have extended the timeclock and we didn’t … We didn’t do the things in a timely way to protect folks like Jimmy Lai and others in a way that I think was within our reach, not impossible to have done.”

Pompeo also reminded us of the CCP’s reckless behavior over Covid-19, arguing that he was sure that the virus “escaped from the lab” and then the regime knowingly “spread it around the world.”

Instead of doing what a responsible, civilized, democratic society — like Japan, Korea, or Taiwan — would have done, which would have been to ask the world to help, China said “put thousands of people on airplanes, take them to Milan and spread a relatively lethal, relatively contagious virus and kill millions of people and destroy lots of the global economy.”

This, Pompeo concluded, “is among the greatest acts that caused death in the world in modern times — we should remember that when we think of Xi Jinping and how much he cares about any one human life and that has deep ramifications for Taiwan and elsewhere.”

So how do we hold the CCP to account for its long list of crimes?

Pompeo laid out a set of tools, arguing that we need to recognize that “the primary field of conflict is economic.”

We need “reciprocity” in trade and investment deals and should treat China as we would treat any other nation, instead of offering “preferential treatment.”

We should build alliances “among rules-following, human rights-recognizing nations.”

And we must enhance our hard power. “This is not just a Cold War challenge, it is a very real challenge and it could get worse if the world doesn’t stand up,” he argued.

Crucially, this is not an anti-China argument. “I want China to be successful. This is not an effort to destroy China. Indeed, just the opposite…,” said Pompeo. “If they get that right, I welcome China into the

community of human rights-respecting nations.”

Taiwan, as a free, open and democratic Chinese culture with a successful economy, is a model, he noted.

The IRF summit in Tokyo builds on last year’s Taipei summit and begins the process of encouraging Asian democracies into this international religious freedom alliance. There is so much that these countries — Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan — can and should contribute, together with others.

This movement is growing, and it has never been more needed and cannot come a moment too soon. Let’s seize the moment, carpe diem, and build the infrastructure to defend religious freedom across Asia and throughout the world.

This article was published in UCA News on 23 July 2024.