Reviving U.S. Leadership to Stop Religious Persecution
The Trump administration can make meaningful changes now.
Over the past 20 years, an array of offices, institutions, and networks have emerged to protect and promote religious freedom for everyone, everywhere, all buttressed by an interlocking network of international standards. It’s been a remarkable historical development, one often overlooked and largely taken for granted.
However, the movement now faces extraordinary challenges. Conflicts dominate global headlines, all while persecution of Christians and other faith communities continues unabated. Persecution of Christians and others in China, targeted attacks on churches and mosques in India, arrests of Baha’is and women refusing the hijab in Iran, Russia bombing churches and disappearing pastors in Ukraine, Christians killed in Nigeria, and more all paint the headlines red.
The combination of rising instability, declining institutional and financial support, and expanding restrictions on religious freedom makes it a perilous moment to be a believer. The United States has traditionally been the only country that can address global religious persecution threatening millions. But that commitment has faded as political priorities in the United States (and Europe) shift back toward hard interests, reverting to the historical norm in foreign affairs without time or interest to focus on “soft” issues like religious freedom and related human rights. But American leadership is desperately needed.
The Pew Research Center recently documented that roughly three-quarters of the global population live in nations that limit the free practice of faith due to government restrictions, social hostilities, or both. It’s an astonishing statistic—every day, billions of people from every faith or none are susceptible to religious persecution. Policymakers ignore the so-called soft issue of religious persecution at their peril, as it drives instability, mass migration, extremism, and human suffering on a massive scale.
The world needs American leadership on this front. It is incumbent upon communities of faith, advocacy groups, and civil society from across the religious and political spectrum to remain committed to advocacy that promotes and protects religious freedom for all.
To understand how to navigate this moment of global disruption, the Everett Center for Global Religious Freedom convened a series of conversations with practitioners and experts from across the international religious freedom community. Over six months, we spoke with individuals across the political and religious spectrum, both in Washington, D.C., and London, as well as via Zoom. Conversations explored how to salvage what’s been undermined, stabilize what’s worth keeping, and build to meet expanding challenges.
Simple or easy solutions do not exist for those working to advance international religious freedom in this turbulent moment. However, our conversations revealed a field that continues to adapt, innovate, and persevere. Drawing on those discussions, we produced a report to highlight how the international religious freedom movement has advanced while offering a practical roadmap for those committed to freedom of religion or belief.
Fundamentally, the movement must stay committed to advancing religious freedom for all. The siren song of religious nationalism emphasizes religious freedom for mine, but not thine. Of course, it’s not wrong to advocate for your own community of faith—if we don’t, who will?—but single-group advocacy won’t secure their future long-term either. Examples of single-group assistance, while perhaps helpful in the short term, were often parlayed for domestic political audiences while isolating vulnerable minority faith groups from the broader community. To revive the American commitment to religious freedom for all, advocates must steadfastly reaffirm this core principle and carry that message forward.
Another priority is ensuring robust U.S. government advocacy, and our report highlights ways the Trump administration can fully activate the International Religious Freedom Act. The act and its amendments, a remarkable package of legislation first enacted in 1998, declared that the United States would be “standing for liberty and standing with the persecuted.” To make this more than rhetoric, the act created a high-ranking ambassador-at-large for the issue. The act also requires the issuance of an annual report on international religious freedom and annual designations of the worst violators called countries of particular concern (CPCs).
These are important, yet underutilized, tools of U.S. diplomacy. Based on our research, no reports have been issued for two reporting cycles, only one country (Nigeria) has been named a CPC during this administration, and the absence of a confirmed ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom for 19 months has created the second-longest gap in leadership since the act’s passage. The ambassadorial role matters significantly, as the senior position can engage heads of state, oversees the designations and reports, and can ensure religious freedom considerations are integrated into every U.S. diplomatic engagement. While the first nominee withdrew, the absence of a confirmed ambassador leaves a gaping hole within the State Department and internationally.
Many Americans are likely unfamiliar with U.S. advocacy, but I know from my past diplomatic work that abusive countries are very much aware. Authoritarian governments cannot ignore U.S. criticisms, which can spur needed reforms. U.S. actions can turn the tide in favor of religious freedom. The second Trump administration, when the president has acted on persecution in Nigeria and in China to free Pastor Jin Mingri, has moved the needle. Those actions were welcomed and admirable, demonstrating what’s possible. Yet they were also singular; the global challenge of religious persecution requires a systematic response.
Consequently, the lack of an ambassador, reports, and CPC designations sends an alarming message by the Trump administration about the position of this fundamental American value in our foreign policy, one that stands in stark contrast to the remarkable efforts of the first Trump administration.
But we mustn’t rely solely on government advocacy and assistance. Opportunities exist to engage the private sector in new ways. While civil society cannot replace the prior levels of government assistance, organizations should assess their ability to provide direct help to those experiencing religious persecution. In addition, engaging businesses about their corporate responsibilities is crucial. By being mindful of religious freedom standards, companies can ensure they do not aid and abet persecution.
Lastly, while the international religious freedom movement’s diverse character as a multifaith, multiparty effort has been a major source of its strength, the hardening religious and political divides in the United States and elsewhere threaten cooperation across differences, including on international religious freedom. At this perilous moment, activists must not let ideological disagreements, partisan disputes, or competition for resources derail their ability to work together to advance this fundamental, universal human right. We can agree on religious freedom for all, while disagreeing on other topics. We must remain committed to religious freedom for everyone, not wavering nor allowing divisions to fracture the movement.
As hundreds of thousands of voiceless still suffer without recognition, the United States is the indispensable actor for this fundamental American value. To revive and strengthen U.S. government advocacy, Americans across the religious and political spectrum should encourage the administration to expeditiously issue the required CPC designations, release the 2024 and 2025 annual religious freedom reports, and identify an ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom to immediately confront expanding violations of religious freedom worldwide. Doing so would also put abusers on notice that the United States is tracking their violations, while giving hope to the persecuted.
Comments