From Latin America to Washington: Advocates, Diplomats, and the Struggle for an American Human Rights Policy

South American actors were crucial in shaping the human rights movement that emerged in the 1970s, both internationally and in the United States.  Individuals organized in Chile and Argentina in response to the newly established dictatorships—in 1973 and 1976 respectively—to protest the brutal repression within their own societies and to mobilize the international community on their behalf. Efforts by South American activists often initiated the formation of  “transnational advocacy networks” and the information they provided fueled the emerging human rights movement within the United States. The direct connection between human rights violations and U.S. policy reinforced the voices of South American advocates in the United States. This paper will examine how human rights advocates in Chile and Argentina utilized personal contacts and international media to publicize the horrific conditions and excesses perpetuated by military regimes on their own citizens and challenge U.S. policies that traditionally supported those regimes. The information provided by advocates, organized in groups such as the Vicaría de la Solidaridad in Chile and the Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales in Argentina, influenced international NGOs, U.S. Congressional hearings, and U.S. foreign policy. This study will place special emphasis on where advocates’ ideas were incorporated into the Carter administration’s policies and statements by looking at key bridge figures, such as Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs Patricia Derian, her assistant Mark Schneider, and George Lister in Latin American Affairs, and their contacts in the human rights community in Washington DC and South America. This paper reveals how these individuals and advocate organizations not only offered a new organizing principle in foreign policy, they also provided policymakers the information needed to formulate policy and galvanized public opinion behind those policies, challenging conventional notions of who has power and influence in policymaking.