But in the U.S., a different news advisory was released to media firms and to the public — one with a more generic headline and with the reference to humiliating authorities deleted.

According to Department of Justice records, the firm behind this PR turn-about is Qorvis Communications, a United States public relations firm that provides “press and public relations services” for Bahrain and which has worked with the country since 2002. The firm also has a contract to provide similar services for the Yemeni government’s “National Awareness Authority,” a state communications arm founded by Tariq Mohammed Abdullah Saleh, nephew of the vacated President Ali Abdullah Saleh, whose regime has been repeatedly condemned for human rights abuses. In the last year, the countries paid more than $500,000 to Qorvis.

An investigation by The American Independent with research assistance provided by the Project on Government Oversight found that the state of Virginia also currently employs Qorvis’s PR services. All told, the state has had slightly more than $70 million in dealings with the company.

Virginia’s contract dates to 2007 (link), when the state awarded the firm an approximately $2 million per year contract to provide “marketing, advertising and communications” services, in addition to $18 million per year in media and production costs handled by the company. The firm’s contract was renewed in 2010, with an agreement to provide only “communications” services, and at the cost of $300,000 per year. Qorvis’s contract will be up for second renewal in April, 2012.

Since the firm’s work began, Virginia has since had record-breaking lottery sales, netting $1.4 billion during the last fiscal year — $444.2 million of which the state put towards education. Jeff Caldwell, press secretary for Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, who appointed the head of the lottery, declined to comment on the relationship, saying “this contract predates this administration.”

"Beating marks on the back of Nabeel Rajab after police attacked a peaceful protest on July, 15 005" Img via Bahrain Center for Human Rights

A portfolio of the work Qorvis provided to the state can found on Qorvis’s website. Jill Vaughn, director of communications for the lottery, said the firm “help[s] us day to day. If we have a crisis they are very helpful, and we have a lot of special projects throughout the year.” In the last year, the firm has worked on marketing events and promotions — especially for new products. Qorvis did not respond to requests for comment for this article.

Both Bahrain and Yemen have come under scrutiny of late for perceived human rights abuses. Yemen, in particular, has been censured by the United Nations for the killing of a journalist and for stifling free speech. The government of Bahrain, long seen as a U.S. ally in the region, has of late been harshly criticized. Freedom House, a human rights watchdog, issued a policy brief today titled “Killing the Messenger: Bahrain’s Brutal Crackdown,” detailing state violence and torture and calling for the U.S. to apply pressure to the country.

According to the New York Times, rights groups estimate that since protests began, “at least 34 people have been killed, more than 1,400 have been arrested and as many as 3,600 have been dismissed from jobs” in Bahrain. Earlier this fall, Doctors Without Borders and other medical groups were pitched in a fight with the country over the torture and imprisonment of doctors who had treated ailing protesters. And according to Reuters, the leader of a fact-finding mission setup by the country to investigate allegations of human rights violations now believes “torture had been a systematic, though limited, policy.”

Amateur video shot earlier this year and posted on LiveLeak appears to show protesters killed in drive-by shootings conducted by the police.

“Bahrain is taking a turn for the worse on human rights,” said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch, in a release this April.  The Obama administration suspended and is reviewing its arms sales policy to the country after a number of U.S. senators, including Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Senate Foreign Relations Middle East and North Africa Subcommittee chairman Robert Casey (D-Pa.) called for a cessation. Bahrain’s internal fact-finding commission, and subsequent review of alleged torture, is being closely watched by the U.S. as it determines whether to renew its arms agreement.

Virginians alerted to the dealings often expressed exasperation at the state’s use of resources. In some cases, though, the reactions were more personal.

Robert Marrow, board of trustees and chair of the government relations committee at the Adams Center, a northern Virginia mosque and one of the largest Muslim community centers in the United States, said that some of his community members fled from the regimes whose “image” Qorvis’s services are meant to enhance.

“They would oppose that if they had a say,” he said. “Their preference would be against who have made money with blood money on their hands. And if they’re going to be providing a public service they should be people who should have a somewhat higher moral standard.”

Rev. Eddy Aliff, executive director for the Virginia Assembly of Independent Baptists, said that Baptists would likely share that concern, and that he believes the state should “be putting money in the proper places to individuals who truly need that help, and I think that is how most of us who are Baptists would view it.”

Some saw it simply as a business dealing gone awry. “Virginians on a whole are slightly right of center. which means they’re more fiscally conservative than not,” explained Quentin Kidd, chair of the Department of Government at Christopher Newport University.

For Imad Damaj, president of the Virginia Muslim Coalition for Public Affairs, the business fundamentals don’t add up.  “My suggestion is to the state of Virginia is to look into this company and see if you can do business with another one that is not doing these things,” he said. “It is morally right and from a business perspective it is right.”

The Project on Government Oversight, a watchdog group that looks into the effective use of taxpayer resources and which provided The American Independent with records of Qorvis’s PR work for Bahrain, urged transparency on the issue. Ben Freeman, a national security fellow, said, “Virginia residents, whose money is used to pay Qorvis, have a right to know that the company also works to control the media spin for governments that many believe to be guilty of human rights violations.”

Qorvis has repeatedly come under the spotlight for its employment by autocratic regimes, beginning in 2002 when the company was hired by Saudi Arabia in the wake of 9/11 for the purposes of improving the country’s image after it was revealed the majority of hijackers had been of Saudi origin. While a number of firms perform this type of work, often the transactions go more smoothly. Three of the firm’s partners soon left Qorvis out of discomfort with the relationship. Shortly after, the FBI searched the company’s offices.

That scenario repeated itself this spring when more than a third of the firm’s partners left amidst concern about Qorvis work for Middle East regimes with troubled human rights records. “I just have trouble working with despotic dictators killing their own people,” a former Qorvis insider told The Huffington Post.

According to that same insider, Qorvis’s Geo-Political Solutions (GPS) division has a ‘”black arts” program responsible for creating fake blogs and websites that link back to positive content, “to make sure that no one online comes across the bad stuff.”

Last month The New York Times, commenting on the work of foreign relation firms such as Qorvis in Bahrain, reported about a surge in Bahraini trolls — social media users who “cajole, harass and intimidate commentators and journalists who write about the protests in Bahrain and the government’s response.” Guardian writer Brian Whitaker, who has extensively analyzed the firm’s PR techniques, including in some of the documents referenced in the beginning of this article, blogged how Qorvis attempts to present Bahrain as a tolerant country.

The firm’s founder and CEO, Michael Petruzzello, told the Huffington Post that complaints about clientele are “ridiculous” and disingenuous, asserting that the firm’s work with international clients preceded the tenure of departing partners. And the firm’s clients also include household names such as the Dance Institute of Washington, The Washington Post, Intel and the Rosslyn Business Improvement District, according to the firm’s website.

Department of Justice files confirm that news releases issued on behalf of the “Bahrain Ministry of Interior” are issued by Qorvis. Those newswires often reach a wider U.S. audience, such as this release posted by the Sacremento Bee.

Other examples of the firm’s work include a press release dated June 24 that describes the sentencing of 21 individuals convicted of plotting to violently topple Bahrain’s government and of the country’s commitment to fair judicial process. CNN covered the same event noting that Britain’s foreign office minister for the Middle East, Alistair Burt, was “extremely concerned” over the sentencing and the nature of many of the charges. “It is deeply worrying that civilians are being tried before tribunals chaired by a military judge, with reports of abuse in detention, lack of access to legal counsel and coerced confessions,” he said.

This July, Bahrain had its “National Dialogue,” a program by the state that attempts to achieve national unity on issues of politics and religion. Days before this year’s “Dialogue,” U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner visited Bahrain to encourage the government to speak with dissenters. But the Shia-oriented al-Wefaq, the largest political opposition group in Bahrain and one of the most fervent protest voices in the country, and the General Federation of Bahrain Trade Unions, withdrew, claiming their concerns, including the rehiring of fired workers, had been ignored in the talks.

At that time, Qorvis issued a glowing press release on behalf of the Kingdom of Bahrain saying, “All the participants are actively debating the issues.” On the same day, Reuters published an article quoting a more inclusive choice of voices: “To reach a complete solution to the big problems, you have five minutes to speak? What is that?” asked Sayed al-Mousawi of the main Shi’ite opposition group Wefaq, quoted in the article. “Is this dialogue?” Two days later, Qorvis issued another press release, praising a “second successful day.”

On the ground in Bahrain, however, the results of the talks have been less than successful. Last week, according to the New York Times, Ali Hassan al-Daihi, the 70-year-old father of an al-Wefaq leader, died after being beaten by police officers the night before. In an extensively blogged post, The Times explained how mourners to his death were forbidden from returning to a symbolic square. It also showed video of police vehicles charging protesters and of a Bahrani police’s statement about its using its vehicles that way: “These allegations don’t have an iota of truth, being baseless,” the official said.

Although pieces of the law have been blocked by federal courts, some sections have gone into effect, including a provision that bans courts from enforcing contracts made with unauthorized immigrants. While some states have banned public agencies from making contracts with unauthorized immigrants, no state or developed country has prohibited courts from enforcing any contract with the undocumented, say experts in immigration and human rights.

“We don’t know of a similar parallel, either internationally or elsewhere in the United States, where contracts with unauthorized immigrants are deemed unenforceable,” says Michelle Mittelstadt, communications director for the Migration Policy Institute.

“The bottom line is that Alabama’s law is a complete outlier,” says Alison Parker, director of Human Rights Watch’s U.S. program. “The only country where we are aware of something that comes close to what Alabama has done” is Italy, she said, pointing to a law that makes it illegal to rent to to unauthorized immigrants. “What they are doing in the state of Alabama runs in the face of human rights law.”

European countries have traditionally been viewed as less welcoming of immigrants than the United States, which for much of its history allowed migrant workers to cross the borders with Mexico and Canada without clearance from a government agency. Parker’s colleague Benjamin Ward, deputy director of Human Rights Watch’s European program, called Alabama’s law “unbelievable and horrific.”

Throughout the twentieth century, border security efforts have steadily increased, and repeated attempts have been made to bring formerly unlimited quantities of new immigrants down to what’s considered by policymakers to be a manageable level.

But Parker says there’s an important distinction between controlling immigration at the border and stripping rights from immigrants already in the country.

“Everyone has the right to a family life, to a roof over one’s head, to compensation for work,” says Parker. “Once people are here, there are certain fundamental rights protected by human rights law.” European governments have tended to adhere to that standard.

Mittelstadt points out that immigrants in Europe tend to be registered with the government, which means that the contract rights of immigrants aren’t likely to be subject to Alabama-style laws: “In Europe, where national ID cards and registration programs for foreigners prevail, employers and others would not be likely to enter into contracts with unauthorized immigrants.”

At this point it’s unclear how the Alabama immigration law will be interpreted by the federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, which is likely to step in now that the appellate courts have issued different decisions on state-level “enforcement only” laws (the Ninth Circuit upheld a decision to block Arizona’s immigration law from going into effect earlier this year).

The ban on contracts is especially murky, and there are few precedents that experts can point towards to predict its viability in the courts. The most relevant precedent could be a 2002 Supreme Court case, Hoffman Plastic v. NLRB, in which the court ruled that unauthorized immigrants aren’t entitled to back pay under the National Labor Relations Act. But the Court did establish that unauthorized immigrants were “employees” under the Act and had the right to organize.

However, it may be Alabama’s own state constitution that determines the fate of the contract ban.

As ThinkProgress reported, an Alabama state judge indicated in a decision earlier this week that the contract ban appears to violate Section 95 of Alabama’s own constitution, which states:

There can be no law of this state impairing the obligation of contracts by destroying or impairing the remedy for their enforcement; and the legislature shall have no power to revive any right or remedy which may have become barred by lapse of time, or by any statute of this state. After suit has been commenced on any cause of action, the legislature shall have no power to take away such cause of action, or destroy any existing defense to such suit.

In an opinion on a breach of contract lawsuit filed by an undocumented immigrant, Alabama Circuit Judge Scott Vowell wrote, “It may well be that that [the Alabama immigration law] also violates this section of the constitution” by “impairing the obligation of contracts.”

But since the case in question was filed before the immigration law went into effect, the judge didn’t outright rule the section unconstitutional, merely that the law could not take away an immigrant’s “cause of action” or “existing defense” after his or her case has already been filed.

SF63/HF402 “condemns the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child” and “urges the United States Senate to reject its ratification.”

The U.S. and Somalia are the only countries that have not ratified the treaty which was first drafted in 1989. Two Republican presidents, Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush, helped draft the treaty, and they were successful in getting portions of the U.S. Constitution included, according to Amnesty International.

A total of 193 countries have ratified the treaty, more than an other international treaty to date. The treaty encompasses several aspects of human rights: “the right to survival, to develop to the fullest; to protection from harmful influences, abuse and exploitation; and to participate fully in family, cultural and social life” as well as the principles of “non-discrimination; devotion to the best interests of the child; the right to life, survival and development; and respect for the views of the child.”

If passed into law, SF63/HF402 — introduced by Republican Sens. Mike Jungbauer of East Bethel and David Brown of Becker, and Reps. Sondra Erickson of Princeton and Pam Myhra of Burnsville — would direct Secretary of State Mark Ritchie to send the resolution condemning the act to all members of the U.S. Senate, President Obama and leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives.

The bill contains a hodgepodge of conservative critiques, including the concerns of the Tenthers; as with all treaties, Congress would have jurisdiction under the child rights treaty, not the states.

“The Congress of the United States would acquire primary jurisdiction to legislate to meet our nation’s legal obligation to comply with the treaty if ratified, thereby shifting from Minnesota and her sister states to the Congress of the United States powers not formerly delegated which are currently reserved to the states under the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution,” the bill reads.

The bill also expresses concerns about provisions in the treaty that call on governments to protect the welfare of children living in poverty; such actions would would expand government.

“[The treaty] requires a level of socialized spending programs for the supposed needs of children (which in too many cases simply employ more government workers) that would bankrupt any American state,” reads the bill.

The bill also gives a nod to the sovereignty movement.

The bill states, “[T]his represents a wholesale abandonment of the ultimate sovereignty of the United States on matters within the scope of the treaty; and this abandonment violates the core principle of our self-government: to wit, only American legislatures and the people themselves have the moral authority to make law for America.”

The bill was not authored by Minnesota Republicans, but was produced by the Home School Legal Defense Association. HSLDA runs ParentalRights.org, and among their main concerns with the bill is that it could prevent parents from spanking their children. The treaty “bans all corporal punishment, including reasonable spanking by parents,” the bill states.

HSLDA’s concerns have prompted the group to get more involved in the political process, a move that spawned its Generation Joshua program.

“Generation Joshua wants America to be a perpetual city on a hill, a beacon of biblical hope to the world around us,” the group’s mission statement states. “We seek to inspire every one of our members with faith in God and a hope of what America can become as we equip Christian citizens and leaders to impact our nation for Christ and for His glory.”

Generation Joshua members are homeschooled Christian youth ages 11 to 19 and have been active in Minnesota, particularly in Minnesota 6th Congressional District, where the bill’s author, Sen. Jungbauer, resides.

Jungbauer is also carrying another bill written by the HSLDA. It’s a resolution calling on Congress to create a Parental Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Sen. Sean Nienow of Cambridge is also an author of the Senate version and Republican Reps. Glenn Gruenhagen of Glencoe, Peggy Scott of Andover and Ron Shimanski of Silver Lake have introduce the House version.

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) was the first to reject the invitation citing scheduling conflicts. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) also jumped on the bandwagon and will not be attending the black tie event.

Boehner and Reid will be meeting the Chinese president on Thursday in a separate private meeting. But the meeting is unlikely to be filled with backslapping camaraderie — during an interview with a Las Vegas radio station on Tuesday Reid, described Hu Jintao as a ‘dictator’ –- though he quickly backtracked on his comments:

“He is a dictator. He can do a lot of things through the form of government they have,” said Reid, before quickly continuing, “Maybe I shouldn’t have said dictator, but they have a different type of government then we have, and that is an understatement.”

The atmosphere on the hill was far from friendly ahead of the Chinese delegation’s arrival with the promise of forging greater cooperation between the two economic superpowers. At a briefing on Wednesday morning, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) questioned whether China was a “responsible stakeholder” on the global stage, rhetorically citing China’s trade policy, relations with the Koreas and military action in the South China sea.

“We are back with a new energy from our newly-elected Members who are determined to take back America’s economy and are committed to a foreign policy that stands with our allies and holds accountable those who threaten our Nation’s security interests,” Ros-Lehtinen concluded her address.

Eighty-four lawmakers from both parties wrote a letter to Obama demanding that he takes a strong stance against alleged unfair competition by China. “America’s patience is near an end,” said the group, “We can no longer afford to tolerate China’s disregard [for international trade rules].”

Human rights is another contentious issue on many people’s minds as Obama and Hu meet for talks. A number of lawmakers have called for Obama, as a Nobel Laureate, to clearly voice his disapproval of China’s treatment of Liu Xiaobo, the 2010 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize who remains under house arrest.

Obama did make a thinly-veiled reference to human rights as he welcomed Hu to the White House on Wednesday morning:

“The world is more just when the rights and responsibilities of all nations and all people are upheld, including the universal rights of every human being,” the president said.

Hu countered Obama comments, saying that both powers should “respect each other’s choice of development path and each other’s core interests.”

At a press conference held Wednesday afternoon, Hu did concede that “a lot still needs to be done” on human rights in China.

These comments have put political commentators on tenterhooks as the meetings between the leaders move into the second day.

The ACLU says Lyttle’s story is one of many instances of the detention system failing to provide additional aid for mentally ill detainees, who it says can often sign away their rights without realizing what they are doing. Human rights organizations argue that abuses within the immigration detention system are particularly difficult to track because victims are eventually deported and have little access to legal aid.

The ACLU is suing on Lyttle’s behalf for damages after he allegedly spent four months living on the streets in Mexico and Central America before eventually returning to United States. The AP summarized his case:

Immigration agents “coerced and manipulated” Lyttle more than once into signing false statements saying he was a citizen of Mexico and agreed to be deported, the suit says.

The lawsuit contends the agents searched databases on Lyttle’s criminal history and repeatedly came up with records showing his Social Security number. [...]

In October 2008, Lyttle was sent to an immigration detention facility in south Georgia and interviewed by another agent. That interrogation form “accurately reflected that Mr. Lyttle was ‘a native of United States and a citizen of United States,’” but the agent still said Lyttle could be deported because of criminal convictions.

An immigration judge ordered Lyttle deported in December 2008 without letting him present evidence or deny he was Mexican, the lawsuit says.

His lawyers say Lyttle was then flown to Texas and “forced to disembark and sent off on foot into Mexico, still wearing the prison-issued jumpsuit.”

A spokesman for the Department of Justice told the AP the government would respond in court, while ICE and DHS spokesmen declined to comment.

What should ICE do to better handle mentally ill detainees, according to the ACLU? First of all, the organization wants mandatory counsel for all detainees with mental disabilities. Immigrant detainees are not automatically provided counsel because deportation is a civil action, not a criminal one. While there are pro bono immigration lawyers, many detainees do not know how to access them or are housed too far away from pro bono clinics, according to human rights groups.

ICE is in the midst of an overhaul of its detention system, but the ACLU and other groups have charged it is moving too slowly.

Brewer’s beef was with a report to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. As part of a 29-page summary of the state of human rights in the U.S., the report mentions concerns over Arizona’s disputed SB 1070 immigration law:

A recent Arizona law, S.B. 1070, has generated significant attention and debate at home and around the world. The issue is being addressed in a court action that argues that the federal government has the authority to set and enforce immigration law. That action is ongoing; parts of the law are currently enjoined.

In her Friday letter to Clinton, Brewer demanded the State Department remove the paragraph in SB 1070, calling the inclusion of the law “downright offensive” because SB 1070 includes provisions for human rights. She also argued the administration should secure the border to prevent high death rates of border crossers.

As Brewer moves closer to the gubernatorial election in November, her  tough stance on immigration will make her hard to beat, experts told the Associated Press this weekend. Her opponent, Democrat Terry Goddard, must combat Brewer’s growing notoriety and newfound popularity. Brewer took over as governor after Gov. Janet Napolitano (D) left to join the Obama administration, but saw a boost in her approval ratings after she signed SB 1070.

An Aug. 25 poll put Brewer’s approval rating among Arizona voters above Obama’s. While 65 percent of Arizonans said they approved of Brewer, only 39 percent approved of Obama.

The United States and the European Union condemn the continuing human rights violations in Iran since the June 12 election. The large scale detentions and mass trials, the threatened execution of protestors, the intimidation of family members of those detained and the continuing denial to its citizens of the right to peaceful expression are contrary to human rights norms.

Our concerns are based on our commitment to universal respect for human rights. We are particularly concerned by the potential for further violence and repression during the coming days, especially around the anniversary of the Islamic Republic’s founding on 11 February. We call on the Government of Iran to live up to its international human rights obligations, to end its abuses against its own people, to hold accountable those who have committed the abuses and to release those who are exercising their rights.

On a possibly related note, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, on foreign travel, is reiterating his call for sanctions against Iran for its renewed uranium enrichment.

[I]t was his voice crying out, speaking out, organizing teach-ins against the war in Vietnam that had a major impact on mobilizing people all across America in the work to end our involvement in South East Asia. The death of Howard Zinn is a tremendous loss to a generation of young people who came to know him and love him as a teacher, but also as a friend.

Zinn, 87, died Wednesday of a heart attack.

Calling it “the latest in a string of seriously misguided decisions related to the closing of the secure facility at Guantanamo Bay,” McConnell said in a statement that holding the same prisoners on U.S. soil takes the wind out of the sails of the administration’s earlier argument that the prison at Guantanamo is a powerful recruiting tool for al-Qaeda.

The explanation we used to get for moving detainees onto American soil was that Guantanamo’s existence is a potent recruiting tool for terrorists. But even if you grant that, it’s hard to see how simply changing Guantanamo’s mailing address would eliminate the problem. Does anyone really believe Al Jazeera will ignore the fact that enemy combatants are being held on American soil? It’s naïve to think our European critics, the American Left, or Al Qaeda will be pacified by creating an internment camp in Northern Illinois; a ‘Gitmo North’ instead of ‘Gitmo South.’

Yesterday, although some more moderate civil liberties and human rights groups praised the Obama administration’s decision to move Guantanamo detainees to Illinois as an important first step to closing down the notorious prison in Cuba, some voiced concern that this would simply shift indefinite detention without trial rather than eliminate it.

As the Center for Constitutional Rights’ Executive Director Vincent Warren said in a statement yesterday:

If President Obama is simply moving detainees from one Guantánamo to another, he has done nothing to honor his pledge to close the prison camp. …

Moving the Guantánamo system onshore is not change. Whether in Thomson, IL, at Guantánamo, or elsewhere, the very idea that we would toss aside our founding constitutional principles and allow any executive the power of kings to imprison someone forever without a trial is anathema to democracy.

In the past, McConnell’s principle complaint about moving Guantanamo detainees onto U.S. soil was that they might be accorded more constitutional rights and would endanger U.S. national security. Yesterday, he repeated those arguments as well, predicting that “There will now be another terrorist target in the heartland of America” and that detainees will be able to communicate with “terrorists on the outside,” — “a danger that would undoubtedly increase with the additional legal rights detainees will enjoy once they are moved onto U.S. soil.”

In a letter sent yesterday to Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, administration officials promised that terror suspects would be in a separate part of the facility run by the U.S. military, in a security situation “beyond Supermax,” and will be denied the ability to communicate with other federal prisoners.

Clinton’s remarks, via Ben Smith:

[I]t is crucial that we clarify what we mean when we talk about democracy. Democracy means not only elections to choose leaders, but also active citizens; a free press; an independent judiciary and legislature; and transparent and responsive institutions that are accountable to all citizens and protect their rights equally and fairly. In democracies, respecting rights isn’t a choice leaders make day-by-day, it is the reason they govern. Democracies protect and respect citizens every day, not just on Election Day. And democracies demonstrate their greatness not by insisting they are perfect, but by using their institutions and their principles to make themselves—and their union— “more perfect,” just as our country continues to do after 233 years.

At the same time, human development also must be part of our human rights agenda. Because basic levels of well-being—food, shelter, health, and education —and of public common goods—environmental sustainability, protection against pandemic disease, provisions for refugees—are necessary for people to exercise their rights. And because human development and democracy are mutually reinforcing. Democratic governments are not likely to survive long if their citizens do not have the basic necessities of life. The desperation caused by poverty and disease often leads to violence that further imperils rights and threatens the stability of governments. Democracies that deliver on rights, opportunities, and development for their people are stable, strong, and most likely to enable people to live up to their potential.

Human rights, democracy, and development are not three separate goals with three separate agendas: that view doesn’t reflect the reality we face. To make a real and long-term difference in people’s lives we have to tackle all three simultaneously with a commitment that is smart, strategic, determined, and long-term.

Notice as well the development focus on human rights. After all, liberty in the absence of prosperity and justice typically leads to demagoguery, which is no liberty at all.