UC San Diego UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
UC San Diego UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Moral pressure : American democracy and Chinese human rights Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4b27r7kp Author Chan, Stephanie Tze-Hua Publication Date 2011 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Moral Pressure: American Democracy and Chinese Human Rights A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology by Stephanie Tze-Hua Chan Committee in charge: Professor Richard Madsen, Chair Professor John Evans Professor Daniel Hallin Professor Susan Shirk Professor John Skrentny 2011 Copyright Stephanie Tze-Hua Chan, 2011 All rights reserved. The Dissertation of Stephanie Tze-Hua Chan is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ (Chair) University of California, San Diego 2011 iii To my parents iv “Then you will understand what is right, just, and fair, and you will find the right way to go. For wisdom will enter your heart, and knowledge will fill you with joy.” Proverbs 2:9-10 v TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page ………………………………………………………………….. iii Dedication ………………………………………………………………………. iv Epigraph ………………………………………………………………………… v Table of Contents ……………………………………………………………….. vi List of Tables …………………………………………………………………..... vii List of Graphs …………………………………………………………………… viii Acknowledgements ……………………………………………………………... ix Vita ……………………………………………………………………………... xi Abstract …………………………………………………………………………. xii Chapter 1 Introduction …………………………………………………………. 1 Chapter 2 Studying Public Deliberation: Theory and Methods ………………... 42 Chapter 3 Principle vs. Profit: Sacred Deliberation and Absolutist Reasoning ... 80 Chapter 4 What the Chinese People Want: Sacred Deliberation and Moral Credibility ………………………………………………………………………. 142 Chapter 5 Principle and Profit: The Search for a Cheaper Sanction …………… 201 Chapter 6 A New Conversation: Depolarized Deliberation and New Methods of Human Rights Promotion ……………………………………………………….. 263 Chapter 7 Conclusion …………………………………………………………… 310 References ……………………………………………………………………….. 325 vi LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1: Doxey’s “Typology of Non-Violent Sanctions” (1996) …………….. 37 Table 1.2: Re-Analysis of Hufbauer, Schott, and Elliot’s Data …………………. 39 Table 2.1: Weaknesses of Existing Theoretical Perspectives on Policymaking … 74 Table 2.2: Congressional Hearings on U.S. Human Rights Policy toward China 75 Table 2.3: Newspaper Articles on Human Rights in China ……………………... 79 Table 5.1: U.S. Foreign Policy Tools ……………………………………………. 260 Table 7.1: Summary of Findings on Democratic Deliberation ………………….. 324 vii LIST OF GRAPHS Graph 5.1: Newspaper Articles on Human Rights in China by Year …………… 309 viii ACKNOLWEDGEMENTS I gratefully acknowledge all those who have offered their support and encouragement throughout graduate school and the dissertation process. First, I must thank my advisor, Richard Madsen, for encouraging me to forge my own research path and for patiently waiting for this to happen, for inspiring me to pursue scholarship that makes a difference, and for faithfully reading many lackluster chapter and dissertation drafts. You have been an amazing mentor to me in both sociology and life. John Skrentny and John Evans deserve special thanks for their dissertation “interventions.” John S., thank you for telling me to write the book I want to read, for pushing me to make this work sociologically-interesting, and for teaching me the beauty of comparison. John E., thank you for imparting so much practical wisdom in such memorable ways and for encouraging me to get things out the door. Dan Hallin and Susan Shirk have provided valuable input from the creation of the prospectus to the final dissertation. Richard Biernacki, Jeff Haydu, April Linton, and Kwai Ng have also been great mentors throughout my graduate studies. The UCSD Sociology Department generously provided some of the funding that made this research possible. To my colleagues at UCSD, I have been lucky to be in the company of such great friends and scholars. Special thanks to “the ocelots”—Michael Evans and Lisa Nunn—for your camaraderie at the zoo and in the trenches. Caroline Lee and Seiko Matsuzawa have provided great advice. Thank you both for taking me under your wings. Julie Lee has been such a dedicated companion in the dissertation journey, from our early days at Peet’s coffee to the weekly accountability. Rachel Jacob- ix Almeida, Eric Van Rite, Kevin Moseby, Brian Lindseth, Tom Waidzunas, Gordon Chang, Alper Yalcinkaya, Jas He, Denis Kim, Kris Kohler, Cindy Schairer, Marie Murphy, Se-Hyun Cho, Melody Chiong, Priscilla Lee, Erin Cech and Tricia Wang, all of you have made grad school not only bearable but enjoyable. Thank you to the Chan and Lin families for cheering me on all the way to the finish line. I am grateful for your loving support. I would like to specially acknowledge my parents, Kenneth and Linda Chan. Dad, thank you for sparking my interest in China and for always believing in me. Mom, I cannot even begin to thank you enough for your unwavering emotional support and for being such a wonderful guide in life and study. You have the most amazing mind and heart. Harbor Presbyterian Church, you have been such a wonderful family to me in San Diego. Thank you for nourishing me through your fellowship and teaching me about grace. My deepest appreciation goes to Dennis Lin. You have enriched my life in so many ways. Thank you for being by my side through the many ups and downs of dissertation research and writing, for being willing to entertain late-night conversations about sociology, and for keeping me grounded in what’s important. Sawyer Lin, thanks for putting a smile on my face through the stressful times. Finally, praise be to God for His love, justice, and mercy. None of this would have been possible without Him. x VITA 2001 Bachelor of Arts, University of California, Los Angeles 2002 Master of Arts, Stanford University 2011 Doctor of Philosophy, University of California San Diego PUBLICATIONS Chan, Stephanie. 2008. “Cross-Cultural Civility in Global Civil Society: Transnational Cooperation in Chinese NGOs.” Global Networks 8(2): 232-252. Skrentny, John, Stephanie Chan, Jon Fox, and Denis Kim. 2007. “Defining Nations in Asia and Europe: A Comparative Analysis of Ethnic Return Migration Policy.” International Migration Review 41(4): 793-825. Reprinted in Pp. 44-72 in Diasporic Homecomings: Ethnic Return Migration in Comparative Perspective, edited by Takeyuki Tsuda. 2009. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. xi ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Moral Pressure: American Democracy and Chinese Human Rights by Stephanie Tze-Hua Chan Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology University of California, San Diego, 2011 Professor Richard Madsen, Chair In this study, I examine why U.S. policymakers and the American public continue to advocate a sanctions approach to international human rights promotion when this method of international influence is both highly ineffective and ethically questionable. I specifically explore this puzzle in the context of public and Congressional deliberations over U.S. human rights policy toward China from 1989 to 2009. Using qualitative discourse analysis of newspaper articles and Congressional xii hearings and historical analysis of the changes and continuities in U.S. human rights policy toward China over the course of 20 years, I analyze how participants justified their policy stances, whether or not these justifications were considered socially acceptable or unacceptable, and how this shaped what policy options were possible. I argue that advocacy for the use of sanctions for human rights promotion persists, in large part, due to the conditions of public deliberation. The findings reveal that sanctions advocacy thrives in a specific type of meaning context that constrains democratic deliberation—a sacred, morally polarized context. This meaning context made absolutist reasoning and authority bias acceptable, therefore, nullifying criticisms that sanctions are ineffective and unethical. In this morally polarized setting, the force of the better argument did not necessarily prevail, as deliberative democratic theorists would hope. It was not until Congressional deliberation shifted to a depolarized setting that the conditions became ripe for deliberation about other potentially more effective and more ethical approaches to human rights promotion. While calculations of economic and political costliness did constrain the use of some types of sanctions, they did not undermine the underlying sanctions logic toward human rights promotion. xiii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION There are … three tools in foreign policy: diplomacy, sanctions, and war. Take away sanctions and how can the United States deal with terrorists, proliferators, and genocidal dictators. Our options would be empty talk or sending in the marines. Without sanctions, the United States would be virtually powerless to influence events absent war. Sanctions may not be perfect and they are not always the answer, but they are often the only