Working Paper: CEPR ID: DP7026
Authors: Nancy Qian; David Yanagizawa
Abstract: This paper uses a country-level panel dataset to test the hypothesis that the United States biases its human rights reports of countries based on the latters? strategic value. We use the difference between the U.S. State Department?s and Amnesty International?s reports as a measure of U.S. "bias". For plausibly exogenous variation in strategic value to the U.S., we compare this bias between U.S. Cold War (CW) allies to non-CW allies, before and after the CW ended. The results show that allying with the U.S. during the CW significantly improves reports on a country?s human rights situation from the U.S. State Department relative to Amnesty International.
Keywords: International Relations; Political Economy; War
JEL Codes: F5; N4; P16
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| US alliance during the Cold War (D74) | US State Department reports on human rights situation (J80) |
| end of the Cold War (F52) | strategic importance of US allies (F52) |
| strategic importance of US allies (F52) | US State Department reports on human rights situation (J80) |