Carter, James Earl, Jr.

(“JIMMY”)

(1924– )

   President of the United States (1977–1981). Unlike Henry Kissinger, secretary of state under the administrations of presidents Richard Nixon (1969–1974) and Gerald Ford (1974–1977), President Jimmy Carter made the promotion of human rights one of the goals of his foreign policy. Whereas Kissinger regarded human-rights concerns as being in potential conflict with the practice of foreign policy, Carter argued that the United States was legally bound—by virtue of its membership in the United Nations—to speak out against abuses. The U.S. commitment to human rights, he thought, was especially strong in the Americas—the United States being a member of the Organization of American States (OAS) and signatory to the OAS’s American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man. He argued further that the pursuit of human rights could coexist with political, military, and economic goals in foreign policy; that it could expand democracy abroad, creating a world friendly to the United States; and that it could distance the United States from repression. One of Carter’s first acts as president was to activate the Bureau of Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs, which had been created in 1976 during the final months of the Ford administration. Citing a lack of concern for human rights in U.S. foreign policy, Congress had passed the International Security and Arms Export Control Act, section 301 of which established the bureau and placed it within the State Department. Whereas Ford and Kissinger had disregarded the new agency, Carter appointed Patricia Derian, a 1960s civil-rights activist, as its coordinator and empowered her to speak out strongly on human-rights issues. As early as August 1977, Derian’s position was upgraded from coordinator to Assistant Secretary for Human Rights.

   The Southern Cone quickly became the main focus of Carter’s human-rights policy. In the context of the region, human-rights abuse was defined as the violation of a person’s physical integrity. Abuses of this type were severe and had been well documented by the UN, the OAS, and private human-rights groups. The administration used a wide range of methods to try to halt abuses. It practiced “quiet diplomacy” through private channels; issued public statements; compiled “Country Reports” on the status of human rights in the region and around the world; imposed military and economic sanctions; and supported the efforts of the UN, the OAS, and other international organizations to make site visits and publish their findings. Carter’s policy has been criticized on a number of grounds. First, its legal basis: Some ask whether UN declarations on human rights are legally binding or merely voluntary. Second, its definition of human-rights abuse: Should the emphasis be on violations of personal integrity, or on economic, social, civil, and political rights? Third, its lack of consistency: The policy was applied to “soft” targets rather than to nations perceived to be of more strategic importance to the United States at the time. And although human rights tended to improve during the Carter years, it is unclear whether improvements were due to policy or to the destruction of the perceived leftist threat in the region. Nevertheless, there are indications that the policy was successful: the region’s military governments celebrated Carter’s defeat by Ronald Reagan in the 1980 election, and President Raúl Alfonsín of Argentina asserted that Carter’s policy saved many lives during the repression.