Crossroads Podcast: What’s Next With Global Religious Freedom?

As always, the annual U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom report focused on trends in nations known for bitter religious conflicts and the persecution of religious minorities, including Christians.

The list of offenders of “particular concern” included China, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia and others. The commission pushed to add Afghanistan, India, Nigeria and Vietnam to that list.

But religious-freedom activists will also be watching to see what happens to U.S. Agency for International Development funds currently frozen by the second Donald Trump administration. These issues served as the hook for this week’s “Crossroads” podcast.

The USAID debates are complex and insiders on the religious left and right have valid and newsworthy concerns. Consider this chunk of a solid Religion News Service story by veteran religion-beat reporter Adelle Banks, built on quotes from USCIRF leader Stephen Schneck(who was appointed by President Joe Biden):

The report noted the Biden administration’s funding of hundreds of millions of dollars of humanitarian aid through the U.S. Agency for International Development for religious groups facing genocide and persecution, such as Muslim Rohingya refugees located in and around Bangladesh and for the people of Syria. …

“As I understand, all of the freezes are still in place that affect those USAID programs,” Schneck said. “We’re very hopeful that the new administration will act quickly to resolve some of these situations, so that some really needed programs to protect religious freedom on the ground in different parts of the world can be funded appropriately,” he said.

Meanwhile, religious conservatives are watching closely to see which USAID grants are moved to the U.S. State Department. Religious conservatives also want to see crucial aid programs jump-started in the Global South.

But activists on the right have other concerns, as well. 

Consider, for example, this chunk of a New York Times op-ed — “This Is Why Conservatives Turned Against Foreign Aid” — by Compacteditor Matthew Schmitz:

Much of the right’s changing attitude toward institutions like U.S.A.I.D. can be traced to 2011, when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a speech announcing that “gay rights are human rights, and human rights are gay rights.” On the same day, the Obama administration issued a memo directing that all foreign aid and diplomacy be conducted in a way that promotes and protects the human rights of L.G.B.T. people. …

How does including a third gender in the Bangladeshi census further U.S. foreign policy? What American interest is served by making it possible for people in Kosovo to change their sex on government documents?

There are progressive arguments for these policies, which were advanced by U.S.A.I.D. But there are also arguments against them, from those who insist on the importance of sex differences. Domestically, these policy debates could be engaged in democratically, in the political arena. Overseas, though, they were settled by administrative fiat even as the U.S. foreign policy apparatus claimed to be advancing democratic values.

In other words, religious conservatives are convinced that, in the recent past, many USAID dollars were delivered with doctrinal strings attached. At the same time, USAID funded projects that directly clashed with the beliefs of religious believers in Africa, Eastern Europe, Asia and elsewhere.

In the podcast, I stressed that there are important, valid, news stories on both sides of this divide. The question is which stories will be covered by journalists in major newsrooms. 

Graphic courtesy of USCIRF

For example, it was important that the New York Times ran that Schmitz op-ed. But why not produce an accurate, balanced hard-news report built on information and insights from activists on both sides? Why shove these important issues into the editorial pages?

Meanwhile, the RNS report included another important news angle that will need to be addressed in the weeks ahead:

The 2025 report also sought a successor to Rashad Hussain, whose ambassador-at-large post ended with the Biden administration. Hussain was recently announced as a distinguished senior fellow at the Institute for Global Engagement, a think tank that seeks to foster partnerships to build religious freedom.

“I think what’s critical here is an ambassador who has access, not only to Secretary (of State Marco) Rubio, but has access to the White House directly,” USCIRF Chair Stephen Schneck told media in an interview, though he noted that USCIRF does not play a role in the selection process for the ambassador. “It needs to be somebody, I think, of that level, given the surge of, the big uptick in violations of freedom of religion or belief around the world that we’re seeing right now.”

Obviously, horrifying religious persecution continues in Nigeria, as well as renewed conflicts in Syria. Will these stories draw mainstream news coverage?

Also, consider this Human Rights Watch headline: “Ukraine — New Law Raises Religious Freedom Concerns.” The current Ukrainian government, while supporting the new Orthodox Church of Ukraine, has continued its efforts to control, if not crush, the historic Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which for centuries has been tied to the Russian Orthodox Church. UOC leaders have — while honoring centuries of Orthodox law and tradition — made strong, public attempts to cut any remaining ties to Moscow.

Obviously, political and economic tensions will affect efforts to address religious-freedom issues in China. Ditto for India, as noted in this Reuters report: “US religious freedom panel urges sanctions against India's external spy agency.”

The Trump team, in the days ahead, needs to move several pieces on the foreign-policy chessboard. Will elite news organizations listen to activists on both sides of these issues?

Enjoy the podcast and, please, pass it along to others.