Jimmy Carter’s human rights legacy in US foreign policy

Jimmy Carter’s presidency (1977–1981) had a significant impact on U.S. foreign policy, particularly in the area of human rights. His administration marked a break from the Cold War-era policies of prioritizing strategic interests over moral values, advocating instead for a foreign policy that emphasized human rights and democracy. While Carter’s human rights focus was groundbreaking, its effectiveness and reception were mixed, but his legacy in this area continues to influence U.S. diplomacy today.

When Carter took office, the U.S. had just emerged from the tumultuous Nixon years, and many saw him as a stabilizing force who could restore dignity to the presidency. Domestically, Carter promoted progressive social policies focused on civil rights, poverty reduction and opposition to the death penalty. In foreign policy, he sought to shift the U.S.'s global approach, moving away from the traditional Cold War strategy of containing communism at any cost. Instead, he placed human rights at the center of U.S. diplomacy, challenging the longstanding practice of supporting authoritarian regimes in the name of geopolitical interests.

Carter’s vision for human rights was clearly articulated in his inaugural address, where he stated, “The world itself is now dominated by a new spirit. Peoples more numerous and more politically aware are craving and now demanding their place in the sun — not just for the benefit of their own physical condition, but for basic human rights.” His statement reflected his belief that the U.S. should no longer support dictatorships just because they opposed communism. His administration aimed to promote democracy and human rights on the global stage, contrasting sharply with the policies of his predecessors, particularly those of Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, who often overlooked human rights abuses in favor of Cold War alliances.

Historians such as David Schmitz and Vanessa Walker argue in their article “Jimmy Carter and the Foreign Policy of Human Rights” that the shift toward human rights was influenced by several domestic factors. The Church Committee’s investigations into CIA covert operations, which revealed U.S. involvement in overthrowing foreign governments, played a significant role in shaping Carter’s foreign policy direction. The revelations about U.S. actions in places like Chile, Iran and Guatemala, along with legislation such as the Harkin Amendment of 1975 (which restricted U.S. aid to countries with poor human rights records), helped catalyze the push for a foreign policy more aligned with American democratic ideals.

For Carter, human rights were not just a rhetorical tool but a core component of his foreign policy agenda. Schmitz and Walker note that Carter believed the U.S.'s true strength lay in its ideals, and he saw the promotion of human rights as a way to advance American interests while upholding moral values. However, some scholars, like David Forsythe in “American Foreign Policy and Human Rights: Rhetoric and Reality,” argue that Carter’s human rights focus was not purely idealistic. Forsythe suggests that the human rights agenda was partly driven by the need to build domestic consensus in the aftermath of the Vietnam War and the crises in Angola and Chile. By replacing the Cold War rhetoric with human rights, Carter sought to reconnect Americans with a foreign policy vision based on principles rather than ideological battles.

Carter’s administration implemented concrete actions to support human rights abroad. For example, it ended U.S. military aid to the Somoza dictatorship in Nicaragua and supported the rise of the Sandinista National Liberation Front. Carter also took a strong stand against authoritarian regimes, including those of Alfredo Stroessner in Paraguay, Augusto Pinochet in Chile, and the apartheid government in South Africa. His administration pushed for political reform in Zimbabwe, leading to new elections and the eventual recognition of Robert Mugabe’s government. These actions demonstrated Carter’s commitment to promoting human rights, even when it meant challenging U.S. allies.

However, Carter’s human rights policy was met with mixed reactions both domestically and abroad. While many activists and human rights organizations praised his emphasis on human rights, others criticized it as overly idealistic and disconnected from the practical realities of global politics. Schmitz and Forsythe both note that many in the U.S. government and media saw Carter’s policies as naive. They argued that the complexities of the Cold War required a more pragmatic approach to foreign policy, especially in regions like Latin America, where many of the U.S.’s allies were authoritarian regimes. Abroad, Carter’s stance on human rights was often met with skepticism, particularly from U.S. allies in Latin America. These governments, fearing instability, resented Carter’s public criticism of their human rights records.

Carter’s human rights policies inspired hope among dissidents and pro-democracy movements worldwide. Many saw his administration as a beacon of moral clarity. His administration’s support for human rights, despite the criticism it faced, gave encouragement to those struggling against oppressive regimes in Africa, Latin America and Asia.

Carter’s human rights agenda left a lasting impact on U.S. foreign policy. While his administration did not always achieve its intended outcomes, his policies created new precedents for future administrations, making human rights a central issue in U.S. foreign policy. However, Carter’s human rights focus was not always consistent, as national interests often led to compromises. For example, while Carter condemned apartheid in South Africa, his administration also faced challenges in dealing with authoritarian governments that were seen as critical to U.S. strategic interests, like the Shah’s regime in Iran.

In conclusion, Jimmy Carter’s foreign policy represented a significant shift in U.S. diplomacy. His administration’s focus on human rights marked a break from the Cold War era and attempted to align U.S. foreign policy with the nation’s democratic values. Carter’s commitment to human rights remains an important part of his legacy, influencing U.S. foreign policy long after his presidency. Despite the challenges and contradictions inherent in balancing ideals with realpolitik, Carter’s vision for a morally guided U.S. foreign policy continues to resonate in American diplomacy today.

Jared O. Bell, Ph.D., is a USAID Foreign Service Officer and post-conflict development expert with extensive experience in human rights, democratization and justice sector programs. He has worked with organizations like the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Human Rights Council and Peace Direct, and has published widely on transitional justice and peacebuilding, including his 2018 book “Frozen Justice: Lessons from Bosnia and Herzegovina's Failed Transitional Justice Strategy.”

Topics

Behind Jimmy Carter's legacy as president

Jimmy Carter's presidency was marked by global challenges and his quest to unite Americans. James Fallows, a speechwriter for the Carter administration, joins CBS News with more on Carter's legacy.
CBS News - 20h
Remembering Jimmy Carter's public health legacy

From fighting tropical diseases to championing mental health care, Jimmy Carter's decades of public health work reflect a legacy of enduring change.
CBS News - 1d
How Jimmy Carter worked to promote human rights through the Carter Center

The Carter Center, based in Atlanta, was launched by the Carter's after they left the White House and has worked to promote human rights, health and democracy worldwide. CBS News' Nikole Killion ...
CBS News - 1d
How Jimmy Carter Launched His Career and Cemented His Legacy in Atlanta

While his home was always in the small Georgia town, Atlanta gave him the opportunities to cement a political and humanitarian legacy.
The New York Times - 2d
Reflecting on Jimmy Carter's work for human rights and health equity

Former President Jimmy Carter will lie in repose at the Carter Center in Atlanta, Georgia, until Tuesday morning. CBS News chief medical correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook and CBS News contributor and ...
CBS News - 3d
Jimmy Carter’s enduring diplomatic legacy: ANALYSIS

The impact of his single-term foreign policy is still felt around the globe.
ABC News - Dec. 31
Jimmy Carter's grandson talks former president's life, legacy

Former President Jimmy Carter died at age 100 on Sunday.
ABC News - Dec. 31

More from The Hill

Biden: Biggest regret failing to counter misinformation, including from Trump

President Biden in an interview published Wednesday reflected on the highs and lows of his administration, stating his biggest regret was failing to challenge misinformation — including claims ...
The Hill - 31m
Daniel Penny seeks dismissal of lawsuit by subway chokehold victim's father

Daniel Penny, a former U.S. Marine who was acquitted of criminal charges in the death of a Black man on a New York City subway, has filed to dismiss a lawsuit brought by the victim's father. In ...
The Hill - 35m
'Pod Save America' host: 'Biden did not return the favor' with Medal of Freedom for Obama

Jon Favreau, a host of “Pod Save America,” highlighted in a new podcast episode the fact that President Biden “did not return the favor” after being awarded the Presidential Medal by former ...
The Hill - 48m
Democrats are the party of religious freedom, not obligatory faith-talk

Democrats are advised to connect with voters by expressing their faith in an authentic way, but not to impose their religious beliefs on others, and to respect religious freedom and separation of ...
The Hill - 48m
Trump expected to appoint Eric Trager as Middle East director for National Security Council

President-elect Trump is expected to announce Eric Trager as Senior Director for the Middle East and North Africa on the National Security Council, a congressional aide told The Hill. Trager has ...
The Hill - 53m