Abolish the Death Penalty to Confront the Growing Axis of Autocracies
The United States should abolish the death penalty to clarify the difference in the values of the Western liberal tradition of personal dignity, our common humanity, and human rights as described in the Preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights from those of an Axis of Autocracies which use coercion as the means of staying in power.
The only thing that Russia, China, Iran and their proxies such as North Korea, Venezuela and others have in common is their dependence on repression and coercion. These regimes have a record of atrocities that rise to the level of crimes against humanity. Human rights are routinely violated and all opposition is suppressed, co-opted, or eliminated. Ethnic and ideological cleansing are used to change the demographics.
It is just the threat of such abusive coercion along with a pervasive surveillance, sometimes even with a social credit score which controls all aspects of one’s life, which enables these governments to stay in power. These civilizations and nationalities have a lot to be proud of, but not their current governments.
In terms of raw power, this axis of autocracies is formidable. Militarily, they possess nuclear weapons and vast armed forces. They will have equal or superior economic power with control of many essential natural resources, a dominant manufacturing base, and even a lead in many advanced technologies. China alone is the major trading partner of more than 120 nations. Ideas and values, however, are also important in foreign affairs and international relations. This is the area where the values in the Western liberal tradition of personal dignity, our common humanity, and human rights should have a distinct advantage. As President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine has described: the conflict is between freedom and fear.
The death penalty is a symbol and the ultimate threat of the use of coercive power. Today, over 130 countries – about 70% of the world – have abolished or abandoned the death penalty. A country cannot belong to the European Union if they have the death penalty. Since 2008, the United States has been the only country in the Americas to carry out executions. Even 23 states have abolished capital punishment. There have been moral concerns based upon a respect for life and a rejection of such an elective use of violence by the state. There have also been very practical concerns related to the enormous cost, a high rate of wrongful convictions, and disparities related to race, geography and poverty along with there being a viable alternative of life in prison without parole.
And yet, the United States has consistently been among those countries that most frequently use the death penalty. In 2022, the five countries that executed the most people were, in descending order, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United States. This is the company that we keep and for which we inadvertently provide some cover for their abuses.
The most effective action that we could thus take in foreign policy in this battle of ideas would thus be to abolish the death penalty. It would be a powerful foreign policy act. Abolishing the death penalty would distinguish the United States, along with almost all of the other democracies, both morally and politically from the growing axis of autocracies. This would help to clarify that the current battle of ideas and clashes of civilizations are not just about territory.
The major conflicts unfolding today in Ukraine, Taiwan, and Israel-Palestine are not isolated regional disputes, but manifestations of the deeper tectonic pressures reshaping the global order. As Thucydides observed in his account of the Peloponnesian War, profound conflicts often arise not merely from shifts in material power, but from fundamental differences in values, governance, and ways of life. Samuel Huntington, in his book The Clash of Civilizations, expanded this perspective, contending that, in the post-Cold War era, civilizational and cultural divisions would become the primary sources of global conflict.
The liberal principles, affirmed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, were intended to foster a more stable international order after the devastation of World War II, recognizing the necessity of safeguarding personal freedom and our shared humanity in a pluralistic global community armed with weapons of mass destruction.
The current alignment of Russia, China, and Iran is not based on such a shared positive vision, but rather on their reliance on coercion as a means of staying in power and a mutual opposition to the principles of governance and the values of the Western liberal tradition.
The countries in this axis of autocracies have even vastly different and conflicting ideologies:
Russia – Russia has an ideology that is based on a social Orthodox-Slavic nationalism with a history of defeating Napoleon and also Nazi Germany in the “Great Patriotic War.” The Putin government, however, is a kleptocracy which uses coercion and the elimination of opposition as a means of staying in power.
China – China’s government is based on an “intellectual” secular Marxist interpretation of history known to a vanguard in the Communists party which represents only 6% of the population. China also embraces the long history of Chinese civilization and a Han nationalism which is xenophobic and intolerant of other cultures and ideologies. The Chinese Communist Party enforces ideological conformity and controls all aspects of life through pervasive surveillance and a state-managed social credit system.
Iran – Iran is a theocracy which uses the death penalty and other means of coercion as tools of political repression against protestors, dissidents, heretics, and ethnic minorities. It also supports radical Islamic terrorist groups.
The conflicts in Ukraine, Taiwan, and Israel-Palestine reflect not merely territorial disputes but deeper struggles between fundamentally different visions of history, identity, and the future. The clash of civilizations in current international relations is about more than borders and “real estate.” It is about a world order based on the Western liberal tradition and a moral vision for mankind that is universal and respects individual personal dignity and our common humanity being challenged by an axis of autocracies which have almost nothing in common but their use of coercion to stay in power and the desire to create a new world order.
To help clarify these distinctions in moral and political values, the United States should abolish the death penalty. Moral leadership begins at home.