Richard Perle Quotes

I would say issues around human rights - either you're going to take a hard stance, or you're not. You can't borrow money from China the way the U.S. has done and then turn around and say, 'But you've got a human-rights problem.' You can't be half pregnant.

Countries often prioritise economic interests over human rights - hence all the kowtowing to China.

The U.S. government engages with many countries around the world in official dialogues on human rights.

In the '90s, there was scant presidential leadership and insufficient domestic political mobilization for foreign policy grounded in human rights.

There is a terrible price the U. S. Government must pay when it associates itself … intimately with a repressive regime.

I do think that every super power on the globe has a very poor record on human rights.

I can make a joke pointing out that David Cameron told off Sri Lanka for human rights abuses committed with weapons Britain sold it - like Ronald McDonald calling you a fat bastard.

During most of the Bush administration, human rights and democracy in Egypt were on the front burner.

I care about people's human rights and, as a country, we have a very proud record indeed. But I'm also realistic about what we can do... we can raise those issues with leaders and we can talk about those issues, and we do that.

I think clearly the United States, as well as other western nations, should stand by their commitments to human rights and democracy and should try to influence other countries to move in that direction.

Over the years, Western governments have been criticized for working with foreign police who have proved abusive or corrupt.

It's up to any government to decide how to react to the denial of basic human rights anywhere in the world, including Egypt.

I'm more interested in politicians who deal with human rights in their own country rather than lecture the rest of the world.

The promotion and preservation of human rights can and should be the driving force for world affairs.

Stability is a reasonable foreign policy goal, but not at the expense of human rights.

Crimes against human rights, never confessed and never publicly denounced, are a poison which destroys the possibility of a friendship between nations.

It is both wrong and short-sighted to believe that we can better protect our national security interests by ignoring or sidelining human rights.

Defending human rights should be an important objective of foreign policy, and that, too, will sometimes be hard to reconcile with an economic agenda, especially when it comes to dealing with rich but repressive players like China and Russia.

Where are the gains for religious freedom and human rights to justify all the bombings, invasions and wars we have conducted in the lands from Libya to Pakistan - to justify the losses we have endured and the death and suffering we have inflicted?

I am waiting for the day when the German Bundestag debates the violation of human rights in Saudi Arabia.

Promoting and protecting human rights internationally is not just a matter of principle or morality - doing so also serves our national security interests.

It is good that the Canadians are raising the flag among Western countries to raise the issue of human rights abuse throughout the Middle East.

Big global players like China need to do a better job of respecting human rights.

Human rights in China should absolutely play a role in broader U.S. policy toward China. When we look the other way on fundamental issues of human rights, we are also responsible.

The United States, under President Trump, is abdicating an important moral obligation to all democracies by seeming to shrug off the most egregious of human rights violations from both our allies and our enemies.