The idea that Western countries should combine a principled stand against abuses of human rights with “positive” measures to bring about change in the circumstances that cause those abuses is one that many countries have firmly embraced, especially those that commit the most resources to human rights endeavors. Inevitably, there is significant tension between the more traditional approach to human rights of “naming and shaming” and such positive measures, often provoking debate among various actors about the appropriate balance between the two approaches in particular cases.

Debate has been particularly heated over the way to deal with China in the period after the 1989 Beijing Massacre. Around 1997, the policy of most Western governments on China's human rights situation shifted toward greater engagement, including through positive measures, while in the face of reports of extensive violations of human rights in China, human rights organizations continued to insist that a more critical approach should be adopted. The Chinese government initiated the shift toward engagement, arguing strongly that any shortcomings in its rights record were due to the country's level of development, as well as historical and cultural factors, and thus the best approach would be one that would assist the country in its efforts to develop.

This chapter looks at the experience of the cooperation programs aimed at improving human rights in China through legal projects that have emerged from the post-1997 policy shift, with a focus on the work of a particular subset of international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) that implement such projects.