Faith Under Fire - 25 Years Since the Enactment of the US International Religious Freedom Act of 1998

This October marked the 25th anniversary of the United States Congress's enactment of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (IRFA). This law, a groundbreaking act for its time, made the protection and promotion of religious freedom a priority of US foreign policy, something which, for the agendas of other countries worldwide, often remains more an aspiration than a practical implementation. Under this very law, the United States appointed an Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom and established the special United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), which monitors the universal right to freedom of religion or belief outside the US, providing policy recommendations to the President, the Secretary of State, and Congress¹. Complementing USCIRF's work is the publication of annual reports assessing violations of religious freedom in numerous countries².

However, despite these valuable and immensely important efforts for the entire international community made by the United States, religious persecution persists. The anniversary of the IRFA's enactment is therefore an opportunity to revitalize and re-engage in achieving the goals of ensuring everyone, everywhere can enjoy religious freedom. The creators of the IRFA understood the significance of religious freedom as a fundamental human right and a unique part of American history. Religious freedom enables individuals to peacefully guide their daily lives by their convictions and practice their faith without coercion or restrictions from government or social forces. We know the positive impact of religious freedom because it forms the foundation of democratic and inclusive societies, ensuring rights for all regardless of belief, while simultaneously defending the space for inquiry, debate, and freedom of conscience within religiously diverse communities. Such openness is in the interest of not only the United States but also Europe, including Poland, as it can help prevent the spread of violent ideologies and protect religious minorities. The emphasis on commitment to religious freedom, a hallmark of American diplomacy, is something no other nation does to the same extent and with the same reach, which can further make it a reference point for policymakers representing the interests of other states. It is an obvious fact that US diplomatic engagement in protecting religious freedom does not always yield positive results. As evidence, it should be recalled that despite the State Department officially designating Burma, China, and Iran as "Countries of Particular Concern" (CPC) as early as 1999, repression in these countries continues, and worse, is intensifying.

This important 25th anniversary of the International Religious Freedom Act also falls at a particular time, in which millions of people in many war-torn corners of the world are suffering, and thousands of them are losing their lives. October of this year will be remembered as the date of an unprecedented escalation of the decades-long conflict between Israel and Palestine, in which religion also plays its role, which has real repercussions in other regions of the world. A rise in antisemitic and anti-Muslim incidents has been observed in, among others, Europe, the USA, Canada, Argentina, China, and South Africa³. We cannot therefore stand still and hope that the tools created in the last century will increase their effectiveness in the next, because that has not happened, as we are reminded almost daily by news of another escalation of conflicts between nations, which to a lesser or greater extent exploit religion for their own ends. Diplomacy remains an invaluable tool that allows the United States, and following their example, other like-minded countries sharing the same values, to shine a light on the current situation and insist on change. Public statements of concern issued by high-ranking officials may, of course, complicate bilateral relations, but the defense of freedoms and human rights is far more important here. In the current situation, however, this may not be enough. A dormant societal sensitivity to the fate of current armed conflicts combined with a lack of awareness about their sources certainly will not improve the situation of persecuted individuals. The average American or European has little chance to speak out publicly in defense of the oppressed and silenced, which is why they expect their elected representatives to do so on their behalf. In practice, no one in their right mind wants their business partner to be someone who openly violates fundamental human rights, including religious freedom. Similarly, we do not want our partners and allies to be states that suppress the peaceful practice of religion. It is therefore crucial to publicly support the joint efforts of like-minded states which, transcending religious and political differences and geographical borders, cooperate with religious leaders and civil society groups for religious freedom. The gold standard for drawing attention to the problem of religious persecution has become the annual reports published by both the US Department of State and the Commission on International Religious Freedom, which comprehensively depict current threats to adherents of various religions and allow for an analysis of the state of religious freedom in a given country over more than a decade. A still unfulfilled task before us is to develop possibly uniform methods and tools for reporting violations of religious freedom not only within authoritarian countries, where direct acts of religion-based violence occur, but also within countries with a democratic system, where incidents of microaggressions or intolerance towards specific religious groups can become a prelude to much more dangerous social movements. The currently created systems for monitoring religious freedom are selective (analysis covers only selected countries), often methodologically incompatible, which hinders making accurate diagnoses regarding the expected outcome of observed social trends, as is the case, for example, in Europe. We must accept that there are no perfect places for a specific religion to flourish, which is why we must strive to develop conditions that will favor, rather than suppress, its practice. This must be done peacefully, through dialogue, with respect for the differences between the participants of such talks and agreements. The exchange of experiences is here as essential as it is necessary to realize the slogan "Religious freedom for everyone, everywhere"⁴.

In summary, the United States can be proud of its leadership in promoting religious freedom worldwide. This reflects very well the American people, for whom religious freedom is the so-called "first freedom" enshrined in the First Amendment to the US Constitution. However, the defense of international religious freedom is not solely in the interest of the USA. Religious freedom is a key pillar of global peace, stability, and human rights. When people of all faiths and beliefs can freely practice and express themselves without fear of persecution, it protects individuals from harm, fosters tolerance, and helps create a safer world. Such an outcome reflects the values and interests not only of America but of every democratic society based on Christian values.

Weronika Kudła PhD

Religious Freedom Lab