Idea of Human Rights for All Under Attack : Culture: Mainly Asian group at U.N. meeting contends Western definitions are inappropriate. Activists fear serious erosion of vital principle.

A group of mainly Asian nations has launched a powerful assault against the long-agreed principle that basic human rights apply to individuals everywhere.

The campaign, unfolding here these days at the United Nations World Conference on Human Rights, is cloaked in an old argument: that Western definitions of human rights are culture-bound and thus inappropriate in many non-Western cultures.

Activists attending the conference say that, while the argument may be well known, it has been newly packaged in a sophisticated, appealing form that makes it one of the most serious threats ever mounted against the 45-year-old Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the two subsequent covenants covering economic, social, cultural, civic and political rights.

Collectively, these documents form the legal basis for protecting human rights globally.

The attack, known in human rights circles as “cultural relativism,” appears to be focused in two key areas: against full freedom of political expression and against the concept of equality for the female half of the human race.

“The cultural argument is the threat at this conference,” said Kenneth Roth, acting executive director of Human Rights Watch, a New York-based group that monitors political and civil rights in 70 countries. “It is a challenge that has been visible for the past few years, but this is the first real opportunity to seek international endorsement and legitimacy. The debate is going on as if 118 countries had not ratified the two covenants.”

John Shadduck, U.S. assistant secretary of state for human rights, said in an interview that some delegates, especially from Africa, had voiced concern privately that the attack could endanger hard-won human rights gains in their own countries.

“They’re worried (the gains) could be undermined,” he said.

The campaign is not being mounted by a few pariah states claiming that cultural differences give them the right to torture, rape or kill. Such claims would be easy to isolate and stifle, activists said. Instead, several Asian countries are saying that religious and cultural traditions justify a limited freedom of expression and a reduced social role for women.

Roth, for example, said Singaporean officials argue that because Asian tradition places greater emphasis on consensus than competition, Western, competitive-style democracy is a cultural misfit.

“The catch is, those in power determine the consensus,” Roth said.

The main advocates of this argument are said to be Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore, although other countries with notoriously poor human rights records such as China and Syria are eager supporters.

In his speech to the conference Tuesday, Chinese Deputy Foreign Minister Liu Huaqiu not only cited the cultural argument but also declared that the mere accusation of human rights abuses constitutes an infringement of sovereignty and interference in a nation’s internal affairs.

“Other countries have no right to interfere,” he said bluntly. “The right of each country to formulate its own policies on human rights protection in light of its own conditions should . . . be respected and guaranteed.”

In a conference where consensus is required for any important initiatives, proposals to establish a U.N. high commissioner for human rights, as urged by the United States and other Western countries, would seem to have little chance of winning adoption.

The strength behind the cultural argument became apparent last April in the wording of a declaration issued after a regional human rights meeting of 35 Asian countries in Bangkok, Thailand. That document, known as the Bangkok Declaration, stated that human rights must be viewed within the context of “various historical, cultural and religious backgrounds.”

It set off alarm bells among human rights activists and led many to fear that, instead of hoped-for progress in building new, stronger mechanisms for enforcing and preserving human rights, the Vienna conference might see an erosion of key principles.

The Austrian conference is the first global human rights meeting in 25 years and has drawn representatives from more than 160 nations and about 1,000 non-governmental organizations.

Speaking earlier this week, Indonesian Foreign Minister Ali Alatas said that only national governments should be responsible for protecting human rights and that, in this context, “different economic, social and cultural realities and the unique value systems prevailing in each country should be taken into consideration.”

“We’re disturbed by the flow of the debate,” said Anita Tiessen, spokeswoman for Amnesty International.

Strenuous debates under way within many Islamic countries about the role of women are also proof of the diverse views within these cultures, human rights activists maintain.

“At the core of all religions is a respect for the individual and human dignity,” said Tiessen. “We see these as moral imperatives.”

U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher earlier this week underscored American opposition to cultural relativism.