The promotion of human rights has faced challenges in recent years in the United States and elsewhere. In this study, human rights discourses are examined in the context of strategic foreign policy rhetoric by the United States. The routine of foreign policy statements is meant to create audiences receptive to U.S. foreign policy aims, but also reveals underlying ideologies and assumptions. The analysis examines U.S. State Department Human Rights Country Reports between 2000 and 2019. The results show that the assumed ideal model of human rights is heavily based on U.S. political tradition. The performance of other countries is evaluated against the ‘exceptionalist’ U.S. model without consideration of different cultural or societal contexts. Linguistic choices are made to highlight the agency of authorities and events, which can be seen as a strategy of diplomatic face-saving. In some cases, countries are evaluated on an unequal basis based on political expediency.

近年来，在美国和其他地区，促进人权面临挑战。在这项研究中，人权话语是在美国战略外交政策言论的背景下进行考察的。例行外交政策声明的目的是培养能够接受美国外交政策目标的受众，但同时也揭示潜在的意识形态和假设。该分析研究了2000年至2019年美国国务院人权国别报告。结果表明，理想的人权典范很大程度上是建立在美国政治传统的基础上的。其他国家/地区的表现是根据“例外主义”美国模式进行评估的，而没有考虑不同的文化或社会背景。语言选择旨在突出权威和事件的代理机构，这可以看作是外交上的面子战略。在某些情况下，基于政治权宜之计，对国家的评估不平等。