WESTERN EUROPE: HUMAN RIGHTS POLICIES

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP84S00555R000200100001-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 16
• Document Creation Date: December 21, 2016
• Sequence Number: 1
• Content Type: REPORT

Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
State Dept. review completed
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
 Directorate of C-- = Secret
Intelligence
Western Europe:
Human Rights Policies
State Dept. review completed
Secret
EUR 83-10179X
June 1983
195
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
 Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
 Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
Intelligence
Western Europe:
Human Rights Policies
European Issues Division, EURA,
welcome and may be directed to the Chief
This paper was prepared byl (Office
of European Analysis. Comments and queries are
Secret
EUR 83-10179X
June 1983
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
 Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
Secret
Western Europe:
Human Rights Policies
Key Judgments West European governments have long been interested in promoting
Information available respect for human rights, but their actions have frequently been less
as of 10 June 1983 impressive than their rhetoric. The major West European countries
was used in this report.
generally have been reluctant to condemn or take punitive measures
against countries in which they have substantial economic, security, and
other interests. Left-leaning governments in the major countries have paid
greater lipservice to the need for protecting human rights, but their
expediency almost equals that of their conservative counterparts
In contrast to the generally pragmatic larger nations, the governments of 25X1
some smaller countries-particularly in northern Europe-have played a
more active role in the defense of wide-ranging human interests ab:road.
They also have electorates that are highly sensitive to human rights issues
and leaders who aspire to be the "conscience" of Europe. Nevertheless,
they, too, have often had to strike a balance between concern for human
rights and practical national interests
Because of their desire to maintain good state-to-state relations with
offending countries, most West European governments prefer to deal with
human rights abuses through international organizations such as the
United Nations, the Council of Europe, and the European Community.
Even the larger West European nations have been more willing to speak
out for human rights in these bodies, since multinational criticism of
oppressive regimes tends to protect individual countries from retaliatory
actions.
While the governments of the major nations have initiated or supported
resolutions condemning human rights practices in Poland, the Soviet
Union, Iran, and South Africa, they have been careful to keep their
disapproval limited. The European Community, for instance, has shown a
deep reluctance to use its considerable economic power against human
rights violators, except for its treatment of the Greek junta and the present
military regime in Turkey. It has placed minor restrictions on imports from
the USSR, but these have not been very costly to the Soviets or to EC
members. The industrial nations have been even more circumspect toward
South Africa and have not supported UN resolutions calling for compre-
hensive and mandatory sanctions against Pretoria for its apartheid policies.
iii Secret
EUR 83-10179X
June 1983
25X1
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
 Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
Because West European governments have to reconcile conflicting foreign
policy interests, the chief defenders of human rights have been European-
based nongovernmental organizations, such as Amnesty International and
the Socialist International. These organizations have fought the battle for
international human rights with dedication and vigor
We believe that the combination of growing domestic and international
pressures will prompt West European governments to give greater consid-
eration to human rights issues in their foreign policy decisions. Increasing-
ly, West European governments also may be forced to face the demands of
the poorer nations of the world for assistance in strengthening their
"economic" human rights by agreeing to legally binding transfers of
economic resources. Although it is unlikely that West European countries
will accept this principle, they may in the future show greater willingness
to enlarge their development programs and to facilitate international bank
loans to developing countries on more favorable terms.
We believe that West European human rights policies toward the East
generally will complement the US effort to hold the Soviet Union
accountable for agreements made in the Helsinki Final Act. Most West
European countries, however, will resist US efforts to press the human
rights issue at the expense of detente and economic ties. In other areas,
such as southern Africa and Turkey, the pragmatic and low-key approach
of the major countries is more likely to complement US human rights
policies and broader interests than the confrontational tactics of the
smaller states and private groups. In the case of Central America, however,
the US effort to balance political, strategic, and human rights concerns will
find little sympathy except in London and possibly in Bonn.
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
 Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
Secret
Western Europe:
Human Rights Policies
Human Rights: An Overview
West European interest in human rights is the out-
growth of a strong humanistic tradition. While the
principles that underlie the modern concept of human
rights are evident in classical Western philosophy and
various world religions, the concept itself-involving
fundamental freedoms that are a natural endowment
of man and transcend the authority of the state-did
not arise before the Enlightenment. Until World
War I the major countries, except for imperial Russia,
agreed that the advancement of human rights is a
moral obligation of the state. The emergence of
totalitarian regimes in Germany and Italy in the post-
World War I period broke the consensus and led to
massive violations of human rights before and during
World War II.
In the aftermath of the war, West European countries
emphasized the need not only for building and
strengthening democratic values and institutions at
home, but also for advancing them abroad. The UN
Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 was
an expression of the Western desire to promote demo-
cratic principles throughout the world. The European
Convention on Human Rights of 1950 was designed
to safeguard human freedoms in Europe. It gave the
Council of Europe the authority to hear and decide
cases involving human rights violations in member
states. More recently, the Helsinki Final Act of 1975
made the protection of human rights an integral part
of East-West relations.'
Development of an international human rights policy
has presented West European governments with three
principal problems. First, they have had to agree on a
definition of human rights. Second, they have been
' In this paper the term "human rights" refers to individual rights
and freedoms contained in the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, the International Covenant on Political and Civil Rights,
and the Helsinki Final Act. Human rights, as defined in these
documents, include the right to life, liberty, and security of the
person; protection from torture or cruel or degrading treatment;
equality before the law and the right to a prompt and fair trial;
freedom of thought, expression, conscience, and religion; and the
right to human contact and information exchanges. In the present
discussion, economic rights are treated as a separate category of
required to deal with the practical political problems
of implementing a consistent human rights policy.
Third, they have had to ponder how best to make that
policy effective. Regarding the definition of human
rights, West European governments have recognized
the legitimacy of individual political, civil, economic,
social, and cultural rights by ratifying the UN Uni-
versal Declaration of Human Rights and the "Interna-
tional Human Rights Covenants. As signatories of the
Helsinki Final Act, they reaffirmed not only their
recognition of the "classical" human rights, but also
accepted freedom of human contact and information
exchanges as legitimate rights of man. Although West
European governments have acknowledged economic
and social rights in principle, they have treated them
more as aspirations than as presently achievable 25X1
entitlements. In their estimation, the realization of
economic and social rights requires a level of econom-
ic development that many Third World countries have
not yet reached.
Thus far, West European governments have not rec-
ognized the "right to development," a demand by the
poorer nations for a New International Economic
Order. During discussions in the United Nations and
the Council of Europe, West Europeans have support-
ed the idea of development aid, but generally they
have not been prepared to accept the right of less
developed countries to economic transfers from ad-
vanced industrialized nations. West European coun-
tries have "justified" their opposition to the right to
development by maintaining that human rights per-
tain to individuals and not to states. The right to
development would be exercised by governments and
might not always benefit individual citizens
While West European governments have proclaimed
the protection of international human rights as an
objective, most have not pursued a consistent human
rights policy. Moreover, even when they have accord-
ed more emphasis to human rights, West Europeans
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
 Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
have often been at odds over whether they are more
effectively pursued through "quiet diplomacy" or
open advocacy. Both the issues of consistency and
tactics were well illustrated by the West European
reaction to the Carter administration's upgrading of
human rights into a major, openly pursued foreign
policy goal. Although the smaller countries took
comfort in both US policy and its approach, the more
pragmatic larger states remained unenthusiastic. This
was especially true of West Germany, whose chancel-
lor, Helmut Schmidt, frequently expressed his belief
that the US approach was counterproductive and was
endangering the progress made toward free movement
of people between the two Germanies.
Although there clearly is a gap between the ideal and
the reality of West European human rights policy,
some governments have adhered more closely to
moral principle than others. Moreover, even the most
pragmatic governments have paid more attention to
human rights when public opinion has demanded it. It
is fair to say, however, that West European human
rights policy-particularly that of the larger coun-
tries-has been shaped even more by economic, secu-
rity, and other national interests.
The Major Countries:
The Primacy of Pragmatism
Generally, the major West European countries-
West Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy, and even
the socialist government in France-have been reluc-
tant to condemn or to take punitive measures against
countries in which they have substantial economic,
security, or other national interests. This has been
particularly evident regarding violations in Eastern
Euro a and the Soviet Union.
the United Kingdom, West Germany, and Italy, have
questioned the efficacy of continuing these token
economic measures in EC forums, citing the suspen-
sion of martial law last December to justify termina-
tion of the sanctions.
West European governments strive not only for a
profitable trade relationship with the East Bloc, but
also for detente. The review meeting of the Confer-
ence on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE)
in Madrid reflects the conflict among Western dele-
gations between their concern for human rights and
the wish for disarmament. Allied governments gener-
ally have agreed that observance of human rights b
East Bloc countries is a prerequisite for detente.
During the first session of the current
L
meeting, France also attached less importance to
human rights than to detente. But during the second
round, France adopted a harder line toward the Soviet
Union in response to Moscow's stand in the INF talks
in Geneva. Now that France is more certain about
INF deployment, however, it is likely in our view to
refocus its attention on detente and not push the
Soviets as hard on human rights.
Pragmatism has also been the principal characteristic
of the major countries' human rights policies in Latin
America and Africa.
The European Community imposed
relatively minor restrictions on imports from the
USSR after Poland declared martial law, but the
major countries refused to support the more stringent
US economic sanctions against the Soviet Union.
Moreover, they continued to deliver technologically
advanced equipment for the Siberian-West European
natural gas pipeline. We believe that even the minor
European Community restrictions on Soviet imports
may soon be removed. Various countries, including
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
 Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
Secret
The policies of the new center-right coalition in West
Germany concerning Latin America are similar to
those of the Tories. Chancellor Kohl has expressed a
desire to improve relations, which had deteriorated
after the Falklands invasion.
employees-more stringently than the current on-
ervati.ve administration.
Although the major countries generally have played
down the human rights violations of governments with
which they need to maintain good relations, public
opinion has sometimes forced them to take a stronger
stand. Intense public interest in the fate of Italian
2r,XR
25X1
Although leftist governments have tended to be more
critical of dictatorial regimes than their conservative
counterparts, they have been selective in their criti-
cism. The French Socialists, for instance, have
condemned the human rights practices of military
governments in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Chile,
and have refused to follow the previous government's
practice of selling arms to the Chileans. They have
paid less attention, however, to human rights viola-
tions by leftist insurgent groups and by Marxist
regimes in Cuba and Nicaragua. Moreover, the Mit-
terrand government has been conciliatory toward
rightist dictators when political and economic necessi-
ty required it-France was the first country to resume
arms sales to Argentina after the Falklands invasion.
Mitterrand also has tried to stay on good terms with
dictators in francophone Africa. He recently visited
Gabon, and he gave Sekou Toure of Guinea a high-
level official welcome during his state visit to France.
The Social Democrats in West Germany demonstrat-
ed a sense of Realpolitik not only with regard to the
East Bloc but with Latin America and Africa./
When in office, the British Labor Party observed the
EC Code of Conduct for South Africa-which re-
quires businesses operating in South Africa to report
the extent of their holdings and wages paid to their
nationals missing in Argentina, for example, caused 25X1
the Italian Government to make strong protest,. to the
Argentine regime despite Italy's big economic stake in
that country. Italian parliamentarians went to Argen-
tina to investigate the missing persons issue, and the
Foreign Ministry made clear to Buenos Aires that
future trade between the two countries will depend on
Argentine progress toward democracy
Public concern last winter also led the West German
and British Governments to abandon their preference
for quiet diplomacy and make demarches to th.
Soviet Union on behalf of Soviet dissidents Andrei
Sakharov and Anatoly Shcharansky. According to a
US Embassy source, the West German demarche on
behalf of Sakharov was prompted by increasing public
interest in the Sakharov case and activities of writers
Heinrich Boell and Lev Kopelev. The British Foreign
Ministry also publicized its protest on behalf or.'
Shcharansky to demonstrate high-level government
concern to his supporters
The Smaller Countries:
Principle Over Pragmatism?
The governments of the smaller countries, particular-
ly the Nordic and Benelux countries, have tended to
be more outspoken about human rights than the
larger nations. Although the northern countries have
paid little attention to human rights violations by
leftist insurgent groups, they have been relatively
evenhanded in their criticism of repressive govern-
25X1
25X1
25X6
ments. The Dutch Government, which has been in the
forefront of the human rights battle, placed principle
above pragmatism in its reaction to the brutal politi- 25X1
cal murders in Suriname last December. The Hague
cut off its $150 million a year economic and military
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
 Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84S00555R000200100001-0
assistance program to the Bouterse regime despite
substantial economic ties with the former Dutch
colony. In addition, the Dutch Government has stated
that it may revoke permission for Dutch nationals to
work in the civilian and military sectors of the
Surinamese Government unless Bouterse restores de-
mocracy.
The Belgian Government also recently showed greater
concern for human rights than for economic advan-
tage in its reaction to the jailing of parliamentarians
in Zaire. It strongly condemned the Mobutu regime
and postponed the Zairian President's planned visit to
Belgium. The Scandinavian countries demonstrated
concern for human rights as well by their official ban
in 1978 of new investment in South Africa.
That these countries generally feel less constrained by
their economic and other interests abroad than the
larger nations only partially explains their great inter-
est in human rights. They also have electorates,
parliaments, and news media that have shown great
sensitivity to human rights issues in former colonies
and in places such as Greece, and, more recently,
Turkey and Central America. In addition, they have
political leaders-especially Sweden's Olof Palme and
Austria's Bruno Kreisky-who aspire to be the con-
science of Europe by being in the forefront of those
championing human rights. The idealism of the Scan-
dinavian and Benelux countries is reflected in their
comparatively large foreign assistance programs. As a
percentage of GNP, Dutch foreign assistance is twice
as high as West Germany's and five times greater
than that of Italy. Denmark and Sweden, too, have
proportionally larger foreign aid programs than the
major West European countries. The Nordic coun-
tries also have been very involved in helping refugees
through the International Committee of the Red
Cross and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees.
Moreover, Norway and Sweden have special pro-
grams for admitting handicapped refugees to their
countries
While the smaller northern European countries have
demonstrated a genuine interest in human rights,
they, too, have to balance multiple interests. The
Danish Government and opposition parties, for in-
stance, have strongly criticized the Polish military
regime, but the parliament failed to renew European
Community import measures against the Soviet
Union when the opposition parties refused to support
the government's legislation. Concern about political
repression in the Soviet Union also has not prevented
Denmark from trying to obtain a multimillion dollar
Soviet order for refrigerator ships. Although Sweden
has denounced South African apartheid policy, it
abstained in last year's UN General Assembly vote on
a resolution calling for the Security Council to impose
comprehensive and mandatory sanctions against
South Africa. Palme, however, who recently returned
to power, has taken a tougher position. During a
recent visit to Nigeria, Palme pleaded for compulsory
UN sanctions against Pretoria.
Among the smaller southern European countries,
Spain, because of its historical ties with Latin Ameri-
ca, has been most vocal in espousing democratic
initiatives there. Socialist Prime Minister Gonzalez
has shown great interest in promoting political liberal-
ization and has stated publicly that Spain's political
evolution from fascism to democracy can provide a
model for some Latin American countries. Despite
concern for democracy in Latin America, Spain is not
willing to seriously damage its relationship with Ar-
gentina. After initial hesitation, for instance, the
Spanish Foreign Minister last February received the
mothers of disappeared Argentines (mothers of La
Plaza de Mavo).
The former conservative government of Portugal as-
sumed a low-key approach to human rights. Although
the Democratic Alliance expressed its support for
human rights, it did not publicly criticize human
rights violations in Latin America. It also made the
protection of human rights a low priority of its
African policy, in our judgment, because of the desire
to establish a closer relationship with Portugal's for-
mer African colonies. The new government under
Socialist Prime Minister Soares is likely to take a
stronger stand on human rights. Soares has shown
great interest in advancing the cause of human rights
through the Socialist International. While Soares is
25X1
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84S00555R000200100001-0
 Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84S00555R000200100001-0
Secret
likely to speak out for human rights in Latin America,
he probably will show restraint in criticizing South
Africa to protect Portugal's various interests there
including the welfare of Portuguese expatriates.
Greece continues to call international attention to
violations of Greek Cypriots' human rights as a result
of the Turkish occupation of northern Cyprus, but
otherwise, we believe, it has not gone out of its way to
protest international human rights violations. The
Socialist Papandreou government has usually forgone
criticism of human rights abuses in the Eastern bloc,
Cuba, and Nicaragua, partially because of its ideolog-
ical affinity with leftist regimes.
The Role of International Organizations
West European governments generally prefer to deal
with human rights violations through organizations,
such as the United Nations, the Council of Europe,
and the European Community. One reason for this
preference may be the belief that international con-
demnation of human rights violators is more effective
than unilateral protest. A more important reason, in
our judgment, is that international human rights
resolutions tend to cause less damage to state-to-state
relations
In the United Nations even the larger West European
states, which generally have been careful not to harm
important bilateral relations, have initiated or sup-
ported human rights resolutions against countries in
which they have considerable interests. For example,
West Germany and Italy-along with the Nether-
lands and Denmark-sponsored a resolution against
Poland in the Human Rights Commission, condemn-
ing the military regime's violation of fundamental
freedoms and, by implication, Soviet complicity. West
European countries-except for Finland-also voted
in favor of resolutions in the General Assembly
calling for withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghan-
istan and Kampuchea. The same West European
countries supported resolutions calling for an interna-
tional investigation of the use of chemical weapons in
Afghanistan, Laos, and Kampuchea, illustrating their
concern that the Soviet Union may be responsible for
the use of nerve gas in Afghanistan and of mycotox-
ins-which produce a deadly yellow rain-in South-
east Asia.
In the last two years West European governments also
have supported resolutions in the Human Rights
Commission on Iran that expressed deep concern
about summary and arbitrary executions by the 25X1
Khomeini regime. Some governments, however, have
been careful not to overdo their criticism of Iran.l
25X6
25X1
Economic and political interests have dictated the
West European vote on resolutions against South 25X1
Africa and Israel. While West European governments
have expressed public disapproval of Pretoria's racist
policies, most have not supported General Assembly
resolutions calling for the Security Council to impose
comprehensive and mandatory sanctions. West Euro-
peans not only are unwilling to significantly curtail
their trade with South Africa; they also fear that
economic sanctions may increase Pretoria's intransi-
gence regarding a Namibian settlement. The major
West European countries have also voted against
resolutions protesting Israeli human rights practices
vian countries abstained.
The Council of Europe and its Human Rights Com-
mission also have provided a forum for the interna-
tional advancement of human rights. The Council's
Parliamentary Assembly has criticized human rights
violations by Communist regimes as well as by rightist
dictatorships. The Council of Europe, which has
publicly embraced President Reagan's new policy of
"democracy initiatives," plans to play host to a series
of conferences in Strasbourg to strengthen and pro-
mote democratic government around the world. The
initial conference this fall will bring together parlia-
mentarians from industrial democracies, but subse-
quent meetings will also include Third World :repre-
sentatives.
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84S00555R000200100001-0
 Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
The Council's concern for political and civil liberties
is reflected in its reaction to the jailing of political
dissidents in Turkey. To protest the military regime's
disregard of human rights, the Parliamentary Assem-
bly is considering Turkey's expulsion from the Coun-
cil of Europe. Although the Assembly expelled the
Greek military regime in 1969, we believe it is not
likely to make the same decision in the case of
Turkey. West Germany and the United Kingdom,
appreciating Turkey's strategic value, have resisted
strong pressure in favor of expulsion by the Scandina-
vian countries, France, Spain, and Greece. These
countries argue that a democratic community of
states cannot accept an authoritarian regime among
its members.
The European Community also has made efforts to
further the cause of human rights. The European
Parliament repeatedly has condemned Soviet occupa-
tion of Afghanistan. Earlier this year it passed a
resolution calling on the new Soviet leadership to
facilitate Jewish emigration. Recently, the European
Parliament denounced Soviet treatment of dissidents
Anatoly Shcharansky and Andrei Sakharov and
called attention to the internment of Estonians, Latvi-
ans, and Lithuanians in Soviet labor camps. The
European Parliament has also made demarches to the
South African Government on behalf of African
National Congress members awaiting execution.
Although the European Community is committed to
the defense of international human rights in principle,
it has been reluctant to use its considerable economic
power against human rights violators. Members of the
Common Market have tried to justify their preference
for "business as usual" by arguing
that trade sanctions, while hurting innocent peop e,
usually do not lead repressive regimes to liberalize the
political process.
In fact, the European Community has imposed eco-
nomic sanctions against certain countries, but gener-
ally these measures have been mild and have not been
implemented Community-wide. After the imposition
of martial law in Poland, for instance, the EC restrict-
ed certain imports from Moscow. Less than 2 percent
of Soviet exports to the European Community, howev-
er, were affected by this decision. Moreover, US
officials detected growing sentiment among some
member states against continuing the minor import
measures against the USSR. Denmark already has
withdrawn its support.
Sanctions against Argentina-which were placed in
response to the Argentine invasion of the Falklands
and had only an indirect relationship to human rights
issues-also lacked force. Import restrictions did not
cover previously signed contracts and were terminated
after less than two months. Italy and Ireland refused
to suspend trade with Argentina even during the
course of the war.
Italy c 1aime t at its
manufacturing sectors would be damaged if imports
of leather and other goods were suddenly interrupted.
The EC, like the Council of Europe, has shown less
hesitation to punish human rights violators closer to
home. For instance, it cut off aid to Greece and froze
its phased integration into the Community during the
seven-year period of military rule that began in 1967.
Since the end of 1981 the Common Market also has
withheld $650 million in aid to Turkey on human
rights grounds. In both cases, EC toughness has owed
to the belief that states that purport to be members of
the West European democratic community must take
special care to abide by its guiding principles.' None-
theless, in the case of Turkey, the major EC countries
have been careful not to go too far. Although the
Organization of Economic Cooperation and Develop-
ment (OECD) reduced its total economic aid to
Turkey for 1982, the major West European countries
pledged approximately the same amounts as in the
preceding year.
Nongovernmental Organizations: The Chief Defenders
European-based nongovernmental organizations, such
as Amnesty International (Al), the International Soci-
ety for Human Rights, the Socialist International,
' In the case of NATO and Spain, the Dutch for some time after
Franco's death held up progress on Spain's application to join the
Alliance because of doubts that the successor democratic system
would last. They even opposed combined exercises with the Span-
ish, apparently out of fear that NATO's democratic credentials
25X6
25X1
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
 Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
Secret
and West European trade unions have been the chief
West European defenders of human rights. Unlike
governments, which are constrained by their need to
reconcile competing interests, these organizations
have made the protection of human rights a foremost
goal
London-based Amnesty International, the best known
human rights organization, has focused its activities
primarily on the rights of political prisoners. It seeks
the release of people detained anywhere in the world
for reasons of political belief, ethnic origin, or reli-
gious creed. The organization works for fair and
prompt trials for political prisoners and tries to make
sure that they are treated according to internationally
recognized standards. Al appeals to the authorities
holding individual prisoners and attempts to mobilize
public and professional interest in their cases. In each
of its monthly newsletters, Al describes the cases of
three prisoners and asks its readers to send letters or
telegrams to the responsible governments on their
behalf. Al also mounts campaigns to publicize human
rights violations that are not specific to one country.
For instance, in 1981 the organization initiated a
worldwide campaign to expose the use by govern-
ments of "disappearances" as a means of eliminating
suspected opponents.
Since Al has consultative status with the UN Eco-
nomic and Social Council, it regularly submits infor-
mation about human rights issues to various UN
bodies, such as the Commission on Human Rights,
the Fourth Committee of the General Assembly, and
the Special Committee on Apartheid. It also has
provided information to the standing committees of
the Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly on
the alleged use of torture in Turkey. West European
governments have welcomed AI's activity in interna-
tional organizations because its criticism of human
rights violations cannot be attributed to them. We
believe Al has been relatively evenhanded, highlight-
ing in its reports human rights violations by leftist as
well as rightist governments.
The Frankfurt-based International Society for Hu-
man Rights and the Copenhagen-based International
Sakharov Committee have concentrated their activi-
ties on Eastern Europe. While West European govern-
ments have shown little interest in allegations about
forced to work under extreme hardship.
Soviet use of forced labor on the Siberian-We;;t
European gas pipeline, the two human rights organi-
zations investigated the issue last fall in a two-day
hearing in Bonn. A 10-member panel, after hearing
evidence from expert witnesses and former inmates of
Soviet prisons, concluded that political prisoners are
European trade unions, too, have long been active in
the defense of international human rights. The Inter-
national Confederation of Free Trade Unions
(ICFTU), which draws approximately half of its mem-
bers from the European Trade Union Confederation,
last year issued a statement condemning the blatant
violation of human and trade union rights in South
Africa. It also urged Western governments to try to
isolate South Africa economically and politically. In
contrast to some West European governments and
parties, the ICFTU also has criticized the lack of
political pluralism in Nicaragua.
25X1
25X1
In West Germany, the German Trade Union Federa-
tion (DGB) last spring joined other free trade unions
in condemning the Polish regime's suspension of
Solidarity and its harassment of Solidarity members
and their families. The DGB's president, along with
some members of West Germany's Social Democrat- 25X1
is-led government, had initially been reluctant to
criticize the Jaruzelski regime too harshly, according
to US Embassy officials, but pressure within his
organization caused him to speak out more forcefully.
On May Day 1982 he delivered a speech confirming
DGB support for Solidarity.
The Socialist International (SI) also has shown con-
cern for human rights, but it has concentrated an
abuses by rightist dictatorships and ignored many
leftist human rights violations. In Europe, the SI
publicized political repression by military regimes in
Portugal, Spain, and Greece. More recently, the SI
also has drawn attention to suppression of political
opposition in Turkey. In general, the SI has made
little noise about the human rights situation in the 25X1
Soviet Union. Prompted by public outrage, however,
it did issue a strongly worded statement condemning
the Polish regime after the imposition of martial law.
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
 Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
The SI's proleftist bias in the Third World has been
particularly evident regarding human rights violations
in Latin America. At its board meeting last fall in
Basel, the SI passed a resolution condemning "state
terrorism" in El Salvador and systematic extermina-
tion of the Indian population in Guatemala. Argenti-
na and Uruguay received their share of criticism as
well. The Sandinistas in Nicaragua, however, were
only reminded of their original promises for political
pluralism. Fidel Castro's regime in Cuba received no
mention at all. Regarding human rights abuses in
South Africa, the SI has not yet been able to reach a
consensus on appropriate punitive measures against
Pretoria. The European socialist parties, however,
while denouncing apartheid, for the most part have
opposed the demand by African Frontline States for
an economic boycott of South Africa.
Prospects
We believe that the issue of human rights has become
a permanent part of West European domestic and
foreign policies. The question is not so much whether
the West Europeans will take a stand on key human
rights issues, but what that stand will be and how it
will be manifested. In most instances, we expect that
pragmatism and the belief that quiet diplomacy is
most effective will guide West European actions.
These, however, will be interspersed with a more
idealistic and ideological approach that resorts to open
confrontation with human rights offenders as the most
effective way to curb their abuses.
The major West European countries, in our judgment,
probably will continue to take a pragmatic and low-
key approach to the advancement of fundamental
human rights abroad. Their reluctance to condemn or
take unilateral punitive actions against countries with
which they need to maintain good relations is not
likely to change in the immediate future. They are
likely to remain more willing to speak out for human
rights in the United Nations, the Council of Europe,
and the European Community, particularly the Euro-
pean Parliament. Even there, however, they probably
will continue to be careful not to take strong and
concrete actions after voicing their disapproval. The
European Community, for instance, is unlikely to
display greater readiness to impose economic sanc-
tions against human rights violators, particularly if
such sanctions carry high political and economic
costs. The smaller countries, especially those in north-
ern Europe, most likely will continue to be in the
forefront of the battle for international human rights,
but they also will be forced to strike a balance
between concern for human rights and practical na-
tional interests.
We believe the chief defenders of human rights will
continue to be European-based human rights organi-
zations and other nongovernmental groups. Their
published human rights reports, strong representa-
tions on behalf of political prisoners, and denuncia-
tions of oppressive regimes are likely to deepen the
sensitivity of West European publics and their govern-
ments to human rights issues. Already, human rights
questions have become common features on the agen-
das of several West European parliaments when issues
such as Central America and southern Africa are
discussed.
Thus far the West European countries have not
followed the US example of legally tying economic
and military assistance for recipient countries to their
satisfactory human rights record, but this may
change. Human rights is currently one of the factors
examined in the parliamentary debates of some Scan-
dinavian and Benelux countries when aid is consid-
ered and when they participate in international banks'
decisions on loan applications. The European Parlia-
ment recently recommended that special trade ar-
rangements for Third World countries under the
Lome Convention should be made dependent upon
human rights records. We believe legislation linking
aid and favorable trade concessions to human rights
records may gradually be adopted, perhaps first by
some of the northern European countries.
In the future, West European governments in our
view are likely to continue to place greater emphasis
on political and civil rights, but they will come under
growing pressure from the poorer nations of the world
to agree to a more equitable international economic
order. It is not likely that the West European govern-
ments will agree to make economic transfers a legally
binding right of less developed countries. They may
show greater willingness, however, to increase their
discretionary development programs and to use their
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
 Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84S00555R000200100001-0
O M I ICI
power in the International Monetary Fund and the
World Bank to facilitate loans to developing countries
on easier terms. As in the past, they are likely to make
development aid and loans dependent on some meas-
ure of domestic economic reform.
Implications for the United States
Given the growing presence of human rights as a facet
of national and international politics, West European
human rights policies have important implications for
US interests. With respect to human rights violations
in the Soviet Bloc, West European attitudes, in our
judgment, will generally complement the US effort to
place the Soviets and their proxies on the defensive
over their persistent disregard for the Helsinki accord.
This is likely to be true not only of the smaller
countries and private organizations, but also of the
more pragmatic Big Four. Nonetheless, the West
Europeans will remain wary of any US effort to push
the human rights issue at the expense of what they
view to be the more important imperatives of main-
taining detente and profitable economic ties with the
East.
The EC countries are not likely to restrict seriously
their trade with the East to punish the Soviets for
activities in Poland, Afghanistan, and Southeast Asia.
The Big Four participants in the economic summit in
Williamsburg sent strong signals to the United States
that they would not welcome reintroduction of the
issue of trade sanctions against Moscow
West European policies in southern Africa are also
broadly compatible with US policies and interests.
Most West European countries, for example, remain
opposed to economic sanctions against Pretoria. To be
sure, the smaller countries and private West European
groups continue to criticize South Africa's apartheid
policies and its stance on Namibian independence.
Moreover, the Belgians in some instances are likely to
continue to be tougher with the Mobutu regime in
Zaire than the United States would prefer. The major
countries, however, particularly the United Kingdom
and West Germany, prefer the current US approach
that emphasizes quiet diplomacy both on the apart-
heid and Namibian issues.
settlement to the withdrawal of Cuban troops from
Angola. The Mitterrand government is undoubtedly
doing so to mollify the Socialist Party's left wing,
since in private it is in full agreement that the Cuban
forces must go. Moreover, Mitterrand's continuation 25X1
of the traditional French policy of remaining on good
terms with Africa's francophone leaders may not be
conducive to the advancement of human rights in
some of those countries, but it has helped keep them
in the Western fold. 25X1
Far more troublesome for the United States, in our
judgment, are West European human rights policies
in Central America. There the complexity of the
issues and the absence of strong West European
economic and security interests have prompted most
West European countries to give priority to ideologi-
cal concerns. France, the Netherlands, and the Scan-
dinavian countries, for instance, are likely to continue
to complicate US objectives in Central America by
focusing on the faults of the Salvadoran Government
and the Nicaraguan insurgents, while taking a benign
view of the Salvadoran insurgents and the Sandinista 25X1
regime in Managua. Even in Central America, how-
ever, there are points of convergence with US policy.
The British and West German Governments remain
sympathetic to the US's broad objectives, and most
West European governments approve of San Salva-
dor's call for early elections.
Within the Western orbit itself, the measured reac-
tion of the major countries except France to 1:he
military regime in Turkey is similar to the US
approach. The harsher overall West European re-
sponse in the Council of Europe and the EC, however,
places the West Europeans at odds with US ;policy.
Although West European pressures may have prompt-
ed the generals to advance slightly their timetable for
democratization, they have also added to Turkish
resentment of the West Europeans. This will compli-
cate US efforts to keep Turkey firmly tied to the
West. It may also mean that the United States will
have to bear a greater share of the burden of Turkey's
economic reconstruction-particularly if the new ex-
periment in democratic rule founders
Of the five Western contact-group members attempt-
ing to settle the Namibian issue, only the French have
openly opposed the US effort to link a Namibian
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84S00555R000200100001-0
 Secret
Secret
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0
Approved For Release 2008/08/05: CIA-RDP84SO0555R000200100001-0