The U.S. is a rarity among nations. Among its unique attributes
is a commitment to religious liberty.
A new
study by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life explores
religious persecution around the world. According to Pew: “64
nations — about one-third of the countries in the world — have
high or very high restrictions on religion. But because some of
the most restrictive countries are very populous, nearly 70
percent of the world’s 6.8 billion people live in countries with
high restrictions on religion, the brunt of which often falls on
religious minorities.”
Include moderate restrictions, which most Americans also
would consider to be intolerable, and more than half of the
world’s nations limit religious liberty. Fully 86 percent of
the globe’s people face significant limits on their right to
worship God.
The Americas, including the U.S., happily have the least
restrictions in both cases. The U.S. is joined by Brazil,
Britain, Italy, Japan, South Africa, and the United Kingdom in
the free category.
In contrast, explains Pew, “the Middle East-North Africa
has the highest government and social restrictions on religion.”
Combine government limits with social attacks, and the worst
nations include Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, and Pakistan. It
is no accident that four of the five are Islamic. Although
communist states tend to employ among the most restrictive
policies, it is Islam where publics and governments alike are
united in their commitment to persecute religious
minorities.
Not all religious persecution is created equal. The Pew
survey helpfully separates government regulation and social
antagonism. Explains Pew: “government policies and social
hostilities do not always move in tandem. Vietnam and China, for
instance, have high government restrictions on religion but are
in the moderate or low range when it comes to social hostilities.
Nigeria and Bangladesh follow the opposite pattern: high in
social hostilities but moderate in terms of government
actions.”
Still, in general countries that rank high on one measure
are likely to be bad on the other. Both kinds of restrictions are
shockingly common. Explains Pew: “In 75 countries (38%), for
example, national or local governments limit efforts by religious
groups or individuals to persuade others to join their faith. In
178 countries (90%), religious groups must register with the
government for various purposes” — which in the majority of
instances results in discrimination against at least some
faiths.
There were public tensions between religious groups in
nearly nine of ten cases. Moreover, observes Pew, “In 126
countries (64%), these hostilities involved physical violence. In
49 countries (25%), private individuals or groups used force or
the threat of force to compel adherence to religious
norms.”
Pew refuses to judge the appropriateness of particular
restrictions. Countries that act against “cults” often attempt to
justify their actions in terms of protecting personal freedom.
Although one can argue for or against any particular policy, in
practice virtually all government restrictions unfairly limit
individual liberty. Social hostility usually is backed by
intimidation if not violence. Thus, both public policies and
private actions threaten fundamental religious liberties,
especially of religious minorities.
It isn’t possible to precisely measure state persecution.
Pew asks 20 questions and creates four broad ranges of
results.
Actual practice is more important. Explains Pew: “it is not
sufficient simply to look at formal constitutional protections
when gauging the level of government restrictions on religion.
Most (76%) of the 198 countries and territories included in the
study call for freedom of religion in their constitutions and
basic laws, and an additional 20% protect some religious
practices.” However, barely a quarter of those governments
actually enforce their constitutions and laws.
Similarly, many governments implement facially neutral
legal provisions in a biased manner. Of those governments with
registration requirements, 59% act to disable or discriminate
against disfavored groups. Pew cites Singapore, which has
effectively banned Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Unification Church
in this way.
Public subsidies are used to much the same effect. Most
governments (86%) subsidize religious groups. About three-quarter
of countries do so in a discriminatory fashion. Many countries
restrict or ban missionaries and proselytizing. Almost seven of
ten governments harass disfavored religious groups; nearly half
of states employ physical coercion.
Democracy is no guarantee against severe limits on
religious liberty — Pew points to Israel and Turkey. However,
the toughest restrictions on the right to worship come from
otherwise repressive governments which target religious
minorities. Saudi Arabia and Iran rank numbers one and two as the
most restrictive states. (North Korea is off the charts, but the
lack of available information made that nation impossible for Pew
to rate.) Other bad actors are Uzbekistan, China, Egypt, Burma,
Maldives, Eritrea, Malaysia, and Brunei.
The Middle East and North Africa is the worst region. Asia
is second, though there is great variability within. Europe,
Sub-Saharan Africa, and the Americas follow. The median score of
the Middle East and North Africa is five times that of the
Americas.
The real surprise is Europe. Explains Pew: “The relatively
high government restrictions score for Europe’s 45 countries is
due in part to former Communist countries, such as Russia, which
have replaced state atheism with state-favored religions that are
accorded special protections or privileges.” Further, some
Western European nations restrict “cults.”
All told, Pew finds that 43 nations have high or very high
restrictions. Adds Pew: “because many of these are populous
countries (including China, India and Pakistan), more than half
(57%) of the world’s population lives with high or very high
government restrictions on religions.” Just a quarter of the
globe’s people live in societies which largely protect the
freedom to worship.
The other prong of religious liberty is “social
hostilities,” which Pew defines as “acts of violence and
intimidation by private individuals, organizations or social
groups.” Repression is different from tension: “Competition and
even some degree of tension between religious groups may be
natural in free societies, and the freer and more pluralistic the
society, the more open and visible the tensions may be.”
Notably, many instances of social hostilities are generated
by the activities of other religious groups. States Pew, in more
than half of nations “it is religious groups themselves that make
attempts to stop other religious groups from growing.” The
problem with Islam is pervasive. But in Russia the Orthodox
Church targets “religions deemed nontraditional, including other
Orthodox Christian congregations.” Conversions are a particular
flashpoint.
Roughly four of ten nations suffer from high or very high
levels of social hostilities. Nearly half of the world’s people
live in countries where hostilities are high or very high.
Explains Pew: “Often, the brunt falls on religious minorities who
are perceived, rightly or wrongly, as a cultural economic or
political threat to the majority.”
Interestingly, countries with the worst state policies are
not invariably the ones with the greatest social hostilities.
Explains Pew: “Only one country, Saudi Arabia, appears on both
lists. Several others that are very high in social hostilities
also score in the high range on government restrictions,” but
some countries with the greatest religious social antagonisms
have far fewer official restrictions on religious liberty. The
greatest hostilities are evident in Iraq, India, Pakistan,
Afghanistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Somalia, Israel, Sri Lanka,
Sudan, and Saudi Arabia.
Here, too, the Middle East and North Africa stands will
above the rest of the world. Next come Europe and the
Asia-Pacific, where, surprisingly, median social hostilities are
roughly equal. Sub-Saharan Africa follows, with the Americas far
behind. The median score in the Middle East and North Africa is
more than seven times that in the Americas.
Explains Pew: “The relatively higher level of religious
hostilities in European societies is driven by widespread
instances of anti-Semitism, tensions between Muslim minorities
and secular or Christian majorities, and a somewhat general
distrust of new religious groups.” In the Americas only Mexico
suffers from high levels of social hostilities.
Although as noted earlier there is a significant difference
between the worst government offenders and the worst social
offenders, countries which tend to persecute one way also often
persecute to some degree the other way. Saudi Arabia manages to
fall into the very high on both indexes. Among the world’s 50
most populous states rating one very high and one high are 11
other nations: Afghanistan, Burma, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran
Iraq, Israel, Pakistan, Somalia, and Sudan. Smaller
hyper-persecutors include Brunei, Eritrea, Maldives, and Sri
Lanka.
Clustered as the lowest of the low are Argentina, Brazil,
Canada, Japan, Mozambique, Peru, Poland, South Korea, and Taiwan.
(The U.S. rates among the least in government restrictions but
edges slightly into the moderate category on social
hostilities.)
Overall, notes Pew, “it is apparent that the two measures
tend to move together.” While the relationship is loose,
countries with higher social hostilities are more likely to have
greater government restrictions, and vice versa.
Obviously, social attitudes often are deeply ingrained.
Nevertheless, nations with more limited information access tend
to rate worse on both persecution measures. This might be
correlation — authoritarian governments are more able and likely
to persecute — rather than causation. Nevertheless, the finding
offers the possibility that expanding information access might
help reduce religious persecution.
The U.S. government’s ability to combat religious
persecution is limited. Washington can hardly go to war to
liberate scores of other nations. Nor is war a good answer: after
all, the invasion of Iraq inadvertently loosed that nation’s
worst Islamic demons, leading to the effective destruction of
Iraq’s once vibrant Christian community.
Nevertheless, Americans should do all they can to highlight
religious persecution and aid foreign believers, irrespective of
their particular faith, seeking the right to worship God as they
believe appropriate. There is no more fundamental human right
than freedom of conscience.
