Forging New Weapons Against an Enemy “as Old as Time”
Bettina Krause November/December 2024A former U.S. diplomat argues for fresh thinking and twenty-first-century tools to fight religious persecution.
There are few people who know more about the inner workings of America’s diplomatic efforts to promote religious freedom abroad than Knox Thames. For two decades Thames traveled the world on behalf of the United States—from Turkmenistan to Iraq, Egypt to India—defending a simple proposition: that no one should live in fear because of what they believe or don’t believe.
For Thames, who has served under the administrations of three U.S. presidents, this struggle against religious persecution means more than just debates about policies or laws. On his desk he keeps a photo of his late friend and former collaborator, Pakistani human rights advocate Shahbaz Bhatti. In March 2011 Bhatti—a critic of Pakistan’s blasphemy laws—was brutally gunned down in the capital, Islamabad. Bhatti’s assassins sprayed his car with gunfire, then scattered pamphlets describing him as a “Christian infidel.”
Thames has brought a deeply personal perspective to his new book, published in September, called Ending Persecution: Charting the Path to Global Religious Freedom (University of Notre Dame Press, 2024). It’s a book that defies neat categorization. He has produced a page-turning narrative, a unique behind-the-scenes look at the complex world of international religious freedom advocacy.
During his twenty-year government career, Thames served at the U.S. Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (the Helsinki Commission) and the U.S. Commission for International Religious Freedom. He was appointed by both the Obama and Trump administrations as special advisor for Religious Minorities in the Near East and South/Central Asia at the U.S. State Department, where he helped convene two groundbreaking “ministerials” on religious freedom. These events brought together high-level officials from more than 100 countries, along with some 1,000 civil society activists and religious leaders from around the globe, as part of an effort to build a strong international network against religious repression.
Thames is now a senior fellow at Pepperdine University, a senior visiting expert at the U.S. Institute of Peace, and a frequent media contributor on issues at the intersection of faith and foreign policy.
Bettina Krause, editor of Liberty magazine, recently talked with Mr. Thames about his new book and the evolving role he sees for the United States in the global fight against religious persecution.
Bettina Krause: Many people may wonder why it’s in America’s interests—and why it’s even appropriate—for religious freedom advocacy to be part of American foreign policy efforts.
Knox Thames: From the perspective of American identity, advocating for religious freedom reflects who we are as a country. Our founding story is about people who fled religious persecution in Europe to a place where they could practice their faith without fear of discrimination or violence. So this is a part of our national DNA.
But we’ve also seen—especially since 9/11—that if we ignore these issues of religious persecution, if we allow these situations of extreme violations to fester and grow, they can impact our national security.
So when it comes to international religious freedom advocacy, there’s an intersection between our values and our interests. It’s something we should do because of who we are as a country, and it’s something we should do because we want a more stable and prosperous world, with less-violent conflict and extremism.
Krause: There have been criticisms leveled at the role that America has given itself on this issue, such as “What gives America the moral authority? Look at your own checkered past.” So my question is twofold. What does give us the right? And second, what precisely are the values we’re promoting?
Thames: Taking your second question first, I’m encouraged that, despite our fractious political times, the right and left, conservatives and progressives, can still agree that there’s an important leadership role for the United States on issues of persecution.
I remember during the second ministerial conference in 2019 that we hosted at the State Department during the Trump administration, Ambassador [at Large for International Religious Freedom] Sam Brownback invited Nancy Pelosi and Frank Wolf for a discussion. This took place right before the first impeachment inquiry of President Trump. Yet they sat together and talked—a liberal and a conservative, hosted by a Republican former senator and state governor, who was now serving in Trump’s State Department. And together they agreed, “Yes, we have to do more to combat the persecution in China of Uyghurs and Tibetan Buddhists.”
Research shows that perhaps conservatives are more comfortable talking about “religious freedom” and progressives may be more comfortable talking about “religious minorities.” But each arrive at the same end point: that the United States has an indispensable role to play in being a voice for the voiceless.
Regarding the question of “Who are you to point fingers?,” this is one I got a lot as a diplomat. And I would often say to a foreign government, “Look, we’re not trying to export the First Amendment. As good as it’s been for us, every country has very different histories on how religion and state relate. But we’re just looking at the international standards that both of our countries have agreed to uphold through the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 18. We’re not creating a new standard, but focusing on the standard that we have both agreed exists.”
And then I would also say, “The United States hasn’t always gotten it right. We have struggled with these issues, so learn from us. If you can get ahead of this, you’re going to avoid so many difficulties that we’ve had to travel through and we’re still traveling through.”
Krause: In your book you explain that religious persecution isn’t monolithic—it looks different in different places, it’s driven by different factors.
Thames: Right. This is something I gradually came to realize over 20 years of working in different parts of the world representing the United States. So just as you have specific treatments for different forms of cancer, so we need to sharpen our understanding of the different types of persecution to know best how to treat it.
First is authoritarian persecution, where the power of the state is brought to bear against religious groups and religious minorities—look at China, for instance, or Myanmar. Or there’s democratic persecution where a majority faith community uses the ballot box to transform their beliefs into law. India and Nepal are two democracies where we can see that happening. And then there’s extremist persecution, where mobs of citizens can form and people are intimidated; they’re lynched, they’re violated, and the state simply stands by. Pakistan, a Muslim-majority country, is a poster child for this virus of violent extremism. But we also see religious minorities impacted by this type of persecution in Sri Lanka, a Buddhist-majority country, and the country of Georgia, a Christian-majority country. And then the last form of religious persecution is terrorism, such as that carried out by ISIS or Al-Qaeda.
With each of those types of persecution we have to ask, “What’s the best response?” The traditional tools of diplomacy don’t work very well, for instance, in countries where there’s democratic or extremist persecution. When dealing with a dictatorship, it’s more straightforward—you just have to convince one person to change their policies. But in a place like India, or Sri Lanka, or Pakistan, or Georgia, where politicians are actually elected into office on a platform of exclusion and discrimination, if not violence, then urging them to stop means they have to walk away from their constituents who put them into power. And so that’s when there needs to be much longer-term engagement focused on education, starting with youth and with local communities.
A lot of the legislative tools the U.S. government has for combating religious persecution were created in the late nineties with passage of the International Religious Freedom Act. And that was a very different time, a very different context. These tools have done good work, but we have to continue to innovate because the persecutors are innovating; we can’t rely only on tools that were created in the past century for persecution in the twenty-first century.
Krause: In fact, in your book you suggest that these tools—such as diplomatic and economic sanctions—are only as good as the way they’re used and, in fact, if they’re used. The record shows that the U.S. has “pulled its punches” at times. And there are disparities between the way America deals with some countries versus others—like Saudi Arabia, which is an ally, versus Iran, which isn’t.
Thames: At one level I’m incredibly proud as an American of the role our country plays in promoting religious freedom and promoting human rights. We are the indispensable actor.
At the same time, if the United States says human rights matter, then they really do need to matter. Highlighting abuses is an important first step—and in small and medium countries, that’s a very powerful tool. I was honored to be invited to the release of the State Department’s most recent International Religious Freedom Report. Secretary Blinken named specific countries as religious freedom abusers in his speech. Afterward I had a moment to shake his hand, and I thanked him for that, because it’s important that the United States call abusers out.
But if this is not followed up with consequences, then countries will learn, “Well, we’ll take a hit in this media cycle, but the military support will still flow; trade relations won’t change.” Countries learn they can weather that little storm and business will continue as usual.
We need to take that final step of saying, “Look, if you want to partner with the United States, there are some basic fundamentals necessary for this to be a true partnership. Human rights and religious freedom are nonnegotiable. If you’re unwilling to do that, you can partner with China or Russia.”
Being steadfast is important; as we know, there are consequences when countries don’t get this right. As we saw with 9/11, what happens in Saudi Arabia doesn’t stay in Saudi Arabia. It’s in our own interest to use all these tools we have to promote a freer, more stable world.
I’m hoping this book will spark this idea of consequential diplomacy; that while “naming and shaming” is important, we need to be willing to take the next step—with friend and foe alike—because this issue is so important to who we are as a country and because it matters for a host of other national security issues.
Krause: In your chapters on extremism and terrorism you describe the devastation these produce on individuals and communities. Has your personal exposure to this type of suffering over the years changed how you think and talk about religious freedom and religious persecution?
Thames: I dedicated this book to my friend Shahbaz Bhatti. He was a Pakistani human rights advocate who was standing up for those accused of blasphemy, like Asia Bibi, and the Pakistani Taliban murdered him for his advocacy. It was hard to lose a friend like that; someone I was in constant conversation with, someone who was beginning to make a difference. It was hard to see his life extinguished and to see the government of Pakistan completely capitulate to these forces of extremism.
Bhatti’s work was inspiring—an example of the courage and savvy needed to maneuver within a very complicated system to elevate concerns of Christians and other minorities. And his work showed that even in the darkest of places, like Pakistan, one person can make a difference.
We need to do more to protect people like Shahbaz who are on the front lines—to support them politically, financially, spiritually. They’re the real heroes. They’re the ones who are putting it all out there. It’s easy to live here in Washington, D.C., and write a book about religious persecution, but these brave men and women are the change agents, courageously working to combat entrenched systems on the ground.
Krause: What do you hope readers will take away from your book?
Thames: I want the reader to know that what they do matters—whether they are a policymaker, activist, or just a general reader interested in international affairs. If you’re an American, you can write your representative, write your senator, write the president, and insist that the United States do more; that we live up to this commitment we’ve placed on ourselves. For those readers involved in an organization that’s promoting religious freedom, or working in government or Congress, I hope they’ll discover new ideas, new ways to approach the problem. And I hope it will spark conversations about new tools that Congress can create, innovations that will help us better stand with communities worldwide who are pushing back against hostility and persecution.
Article Author: Bettina Krause
Bettina Krause is the editor of Liberty magazine.