HOPE GERTRUDE MULISTUDENT NO: UB 5331BIR11327

PHASE II

COURSE TITLE: HUMAN RIGHTS IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

ESSAY ON:

HUMAN RIGHTS IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

ATLANTIC INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY

HONOLULU, HAWAII

April, spring 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Introduction:- Purpose and methodology of the Essay 3

Description:- The Relevance of Human Rights in the 4

Internationalrelations of the modern world

General Analysis:- IR theory and Human Rights 5

Human Rights concepts and application

Actualization:- Human Rights, the Arab Spring and 11

International Relations hereafter

Lessons Learnt 15

Conclusion16

2

References18

Introduction

Immanuel Kant (1724 -1804) stated that “individuals arealways to be recognized as an ends not means. Allindividuals are to be considered of equal moral worth andstanding”.

The paper examines the essence of the study of human rights ininternational relations. It describes the relevance of humanrights study to our modern State, our regional and globalrelations. The paper examines the empirical and normativeapproaches to the realization of human rights. It furtherexamines human rights in the context of InternationalRelations Theory therefore the;-

i. Realist discourse on human rights,

ii. Liberalist discourse on human rights and

iii. Marxist discourse on human rights.

iv. Constructivist discourse on human rights

The paper highlights the evolution, human rights concept anddiscusses human rights principles, standards and approach to

3

measure human rights based development and as well as thechallenges.

The paper further examines what international legalinstruments have been developed to protect, promote andfulfill human rights as well as the enforceability of suchinstruments in the international system. It examines theeffectiveness of sanctions and adjudication at theinternational arena.

In the actualization or case study the paper demonstrates thecentrality of human rights in originating, spreading, shapingand sustaining the Arab Spring as well as the relationshipsthat these Arab nations will have with other nations.

Further, in the actualization or case study on the ArabSpring, the paper examines the role of the State in relationthe protection, promotion and fulfillment of human rights. Thepaper then explores the place and role of human rights inshaping relations between States as well in foreign policydecision making. It also examines the role of other actorssuch as transnational corporates, multilaterals and civilsociety in the protection, promotion and fulfillment of humanrights.

The paper illustrates some of the Lessons I have learnt onhuman rights study in the context of international relations.The lessons learnt reflect the role of human rights can playin shaping economic, social and political agendas, structuresand systems. The paper concludes with an emphasis on the needto evolve a system that serves humanity rather thansuperficially re-organizing the current system whosefundamentals drive dehumanization and erodes human as well asecological dignity.

Description

Human rights have evolved over lifelong centuries of basicnotions of justice, social interaction and dignity. Human

4

rights continue to drive and focus debates as well as effortsof diverse interest groups, institutions and nations aroundthe globe. It is worth noting that demands for human rightsare not just abstract debates but are determining the agendaof political leaders, life lines and legitimacy of States indifferent parts of the world, thus their inherentrevolutionary nature.

It is for this reason that the study of human rights withinthe context of relations of nations and actors in theinternational arena is essential and of value to thediscipline of International Relations. The study of humanrights in international relations provides us with a frameworkto conceptualize, explain, theorize, comprehend prevailingsituations and identify emerging trends of human rights thatinfluence, determine policies and sustain relations amongststates, individuals and institutions of the world.

The study of human rights in international relations alsoenlightens us on the reasoning and positions taken bycritiques of human rights, the counter criticism and thefuture human rights. Human rights propose certain normativeagenda that is envisioned over time to be ethical constitutionof the international system. Human rights seek to provideindividuals around the world with sustained dignity andhappiness in their lives. The study of human rights ininternational relations allows us to examine, the evolution,concepts and approaches to rights.

The study of human rights includes of various dynamics such asthe normative ie the philosophical and policy questions, theempirical ie real practical application in the world andcritical approaches. It is worth noting that, the mainchallenge remains in the lack of clear demarcation thereforethe overlapping that may occur on the normative and empiricalstudy of human rights.

5

The study of Human Rights in International Relations isessential as Human Rights continue shaping relationships,economics and politics amongst actors and nations in differentparts of the world. Human Rights will remain at the centre ofthe national dynamics and international system driving itsresponse, adequacy, reforms and evolution as each individual,group and society seek to have their rights protected,promoted and fulfilled.

Issa Shivji posed that “human rights mirror the strugglesand concerns of dominant groups in society at aparticular time as these groups organize and reorganizeto maintain their positions or overthrow the existingorder”

General Analysis

International relations theory and Human rights

“Human rights are what reason requires andconscience demands. They are us and we are them.Human rights are rights that any person has as ahuman. We are all deserving of human rights. Onecannot be true without the other” Kofi Annan formerSecretary General of the United Nations.

The roots of human rights can be traced as far back as theexistence of humanity itself with a prominence in the age ofnatural law. The age of natural law prevailed during the raiseof Christianity driven by the Church and was anchored inobjective or divinely sanctioned moral rights that werederived from duties owed to one another and God therefore theNatural law followed by Duty then Rights Structure.

Over centuries, the concept of rights has developed graduallyin the western political sphere and reached its climax during

6

the first golden age known as the “European Enlightenment”.During the European Enlightenment various political documentsattempted to enumerate rights with concepts such as freedom,liberty, individuality and their relationship with religionand government. These significant documents led to thedeclarations that called for individual freedom fromabsolutist control resulting in the revolt of the Americansfrom the British and the grand document the “age of Rights”led to the Declaration of Independence of the USA in 1776. InFrance, the “Rights of Man” a document that declares “all menare born free and equal in dignity” was the rallying call forindependence and human rights to date.

International Relations perspectives on Human rights

Demands for rights were driven by crucial philosophicaldebates amongst the conservatives, liberals, Marxists amongstothers that sought to conceptualize and capture the unfoldinghistorical events that draw from natural law, first and secondworld wars, cold war, their controversies and criticisms andconsequences of human rights demands. Below are briefhighlights of some schools of thought and their positionsrelated to human rights

i. The realist discourse is anchored on the principle thateach nation has the right to determine its destiny andthat the state is the principle unit of relations at theinternational arena. Realism therefore poses thesovereignty challenge is due to the lack of aninternational orderer in the protection of human rightsat the international level. Realists also belief statesthat the citizen is the subordinate to the state andcitizens derive their rights from the state. Realismbelief human rights are useful tools to enhance statesecurity and when human rights undermine state securitythey should be abandoned. Realism challenges the doublestandard and disparity between the articulation and

7

practice of human rights at the international and thenational level. Realism also considers human rights anexercise of diplomatic talk with no practicability otherthan if it serves to benefit the interests and power of aState, noting that Hobbes stated “treaties that are notimposed by force are but words”. Realists also have anethical objection to the assumption of universalmorality, and note that “exhortations to obey theuniversal moral law are simply techniques to hide thepursuit of narrow selfish interests” Carr (1956) andMorgenthau (1948).

ii. The liberalists discourse has its roots in westerntraditional thought and anchors human rights on theindividual also known as the rights holder and organizespolitical institutions to serve the rights holder withits roots in western tradition of thought. The politicalinstitutions have therefore responsibility or duty thusthe duty bearer. Liberalism posits that politicalinstitutions derive their legitimacy and authority fromresponding to rights of individual rights holders. Todeal with the dilemma presented by the principle ofuniversality of human rights and sovereignty question,liberalism proposes the expansion of the liberal “zone”thereby ensuring a decline in the authoritarian statesacross the world and entrenching a prevalence of liberalstates and the strengthening of internationalinstitutions to enhance incentives for the member statesto respect human rights an uphold dignity at the expenseof narrow state interests. In relation to sustainabilityof human rights, Liberalism depend on institutions toembed the practice meaning in the event institutions areweak human rights realization would be highly undermined.

iii. The Marxist discourse narrates the right to privateproperty as the instrument of the bourgeoisie andfoundation of exploitation, alienation and subversion of

8

human rights, real security and fulfilment. The discourseexpounds that the liberalist human rights, are based oncapitalist structure is about the state protecting thecapitalist interests and ignoring the rights of theworkers or proletariat. Marxism therefore calls for thesuppression of proprietary relations and the need toreplace it with real human relations, cooperative wealthand a radical social change.

iv. The Constructivists perceive human rights as constructsof human social -political interactions and not“automatic givens”. The discourse examines thepracticalities and functionalities of society, thesystems and political environment in the realization ofhuman rights. Social constructivists argue that inter –state order will depend on the capability of states tocreate, share norms and values that entrench humandignity as the core of their state craft and over timetransformation that embraces human dignity as a universalvalue will become the norm. Therefore with time theprotection of human rights becomes “integral to the moralpurpose of the modern state, to the dominant rationalthat licences the organization of power and authorityinto territorially defined sovereign units” Reus – Smit(2001: pg 520) Constructivists posit that the risk statesface by directly negating human dignity and human rightsis exclusion, coercion and upheavals therefore the needfor NO tension between human rights and statesovereignty.

v. The Feminist discourse challenges the parochial nature ofthe “rights of man” as they literally refer to the rightsand autonomy afforded to men and denied to women. Thediscourse further explains that women may be consideredof equal moral worth but they do not enjoy equalopportunities or place in society. Immense efforts andinterventions have secured and institutionalized women

9

rights in the UN Convention on the Elimination of allforms of Discrimination against women (CEDAW).

Human rights concepts and application

Generations or categories of rights

In the 1970s Karel Vasak drawing from the French revolutionand Declaration, on the right to Liberty, Equality andFraternity, developed the concept of generations of rightsthat can be explained as categorization of the rights. KarelVasak categorised the generations of rights as follows.

First generation rights that focus on the individual’s libertyin the context of their civic and political rights as well astheir protection from encroachment by the State. They includethe freedom of speech, religion, association, to fair trial,to vote, amongst others. Owing to the fact that in order forthe rights to be realized and enjoyed by individuals the statehas to be deterred from interference therefore the term“negative” rights. These first generation rights are codifiedin the UN International Covenant on civil and politicalrights.

Second generation rights are anchored on the right of allhuman beings to equally access and benefit from basic publicgoods and services in order for each individual to life adignified life. Today, second generation rights were thereforeanchored on the principle of equality across the social,economic, political and cultural spheres of each human being.They include the right to basic education, health services,economic subsistence, housing, work and they are entrenched inthe UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and CulturalRights. These rights require for the State to act or undertakepositive interference to ensure they are protected, promotedand fulfilled therefore the current term “positive rights”.

Third generation rights are premised on the human need toassociate, build fraternal relations and stand in solidarity

10

with their fellow humans. Third generation rights address thecommunal nature of humans including recognition of minoritygroups, social identity and cultural rights. So far, theserights are the least institutionalized, most controversial andare commonly termed as group rights enshrined in the UN Rightsof the peoples to peace and or in the Right to development.

It is essential to note that, drawing on the work by KarelVasak, recently a new generation of rights has evolved. It isidentified as the Fourth generation rights. These rights areanchored on human relationship to the environment. Theyexpress the right for each individual to enjoy a healthyenvironment therefore calling for the protection, enhancementof positive and sustainable environment. These rightsrecognize that humans can’t survive without a healthy universeand that life is not the preserve of humans only but also ofall ecology around us, therefore the need for eco-friendlydevelopment to be aligned simultaneously with the enjoyment offirst, second and third generational rights.

Application of human rights

In the 1990s an emergence of increasing contact between humandevelopment practitioners and human rights groups, led to agradual convergence of the two groups of practitioners. Thisconvergence was driven by the human development interest inhuman rights and therefore practitioners in social, economicand cultural rights commenced conversations on the overallwellbeing of the person. This concern for the overallwellbeing of the person has caused a shift from the siloapproach to human development to the application a humanrights approach to development.

Human rights development requires the achievement of a desiredoutcome through an established process that is adequate toachieve and sustain the desired outcome. The process must beanchored on local quality participation, ownership,empowerment and sustainability. In application of human rights

11

in the policy and processes of development, human rightsprinciples are essential as they provide us with the guidingfoundational values and principles as stated by UNDP (2003a);

i. Equality of opportunities and non- discrimination

ii. Participation and inclusion

iii. Transparency, accountability and rule of law,

iv. Universality and inalienability

v. Indivisibility and interdependent

Amongst the all principles the principle of universality posesthe major challenge noting that while all persons across theglobe agree with human dignity they do not have similar waysof embracing and practicing universally and each does soinformed by their own ways of life. The universality ofrights is also challenged owing to the fact that States cedepart of their sovereignty and authority to the internationalsystem by signing, ratifying and domesticating human rightsinstruments on behalf of their citizens. Langlois (2004)terms this “legal positivism”. This usurping of citizenspositions by the State, begs the question as to whether theindividual citizen was well informed of what the State signsand agrees with State .

The danger posed by “legal positivism” is the possiblereduction or equation of human rights to legal rights,therefore applicable only where there are laws, agreements orinstitutions to enforce. This would mean that lack of theselaws, agreements and or institutions would translate to lackof human rights therefore a precarious situation to the gainsmade so far. In the context of cultural relativism anddiversity, human rights have been criticized as not beingrespectful of cultural differences, religious doctrine andphilosophical traditions of diverse communities across theworld. This lack of respect has been attributed to the lack of

12

respect and tolerance to diversity of peoples’ identities. Thecommon source of this challenge is the lack of differentiationbetween theoretical cultural relativism which attempts toundermine the establishment of universal human rights and theempirical relativism which recognizes that all persons, groupsand communities are unique and different.

Standards

The fulfilment of one human right often depends on thefulfilment of other rights. Human right standards guide us inexamining the outcomes of policies and programmes that weundertake in order to enhance the realization and enjoyment ofhuman rights in our societies. Human rights standards provideus with bench marks or the criteria to assess thequalitatively if human rights are being enjoyed and realizedby citizens of specific communities, nations or regions.

These standards form the normative content of human rights andthey include availability, accessibility, acceptability orappropriateness, adoptability and good quality of public goodsand services to all the citizens with a special attention andfocus granted to the enjoyment of the most deprived andmarginalized in our societies.

Approach

The human rights based approach (HRBA) to development is aframework to address the challenges of the most marginalizedin order to ensure no person or group or community or regionis left behind in our quest for development. Noting thathuman rights primarily focus on the relationship between dutybearers and rights holders, it calls for the examination ofthe demand and supply side as well as the responsibilities andobligations of each.

Human rights based development requires a supply side of dutybearers who progressively protect, promote and fulfil human

13

rights and have the capacities to comprehend and sustainablyprovide;

i. Spaces and necessary conditions for meaningful continuousstakeholder participation in all processes at the micro,meso and macro levels.

ii. Technical abilities to develop effective policies withappropriate budget generation and allocations based onconcrete entitlement, deliver them and transfer technicalknowledge to the local citizens

iii. Complaint and redress mechanisms that at entrenched ineach step of the policy and project cycles to ensuredeviations are immediately addressed and ownership by thelocal beneficiaries is maintained

On the other hand, human rights based development requires ademand side of citizens that are progressively educated andaware of their responsibilities as well as know the channelsto claim as rights holders.

The protection, promotion and fulfilment of human rights areguided by laws, conventions and treaties at the national,regional and global level. The conventions and treaties at theinternational level are entered into by States on behalf oftheir citizens and therefore binding the citizens as well asthe States. Some of the regional treaties related to humanrights include the European Convention on human rights (1950),the American Convention on Human Rights (1969), the AfricanCharter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (1981). Internationaland regional instruments on human rights depend highly on thenational governments to protect, promote and fulfil the rightsof citizens within their borders. Enforcement at the variouslevels depend largely on the agreements, capacities, goodwilland commitment of the member states as well as the mandatedinternational and regional institutions. Such institutionsinclude the international courts e.g the International

14

Criminal Court, the East African Court of Justice and theenvision African Union Court amongst other courts and nationalhuman rights commissions as stipulated in the Paris principleson National Human Rights Institutions.

At the national the rights are enshrined in constitutions andlocal laws that are part of the architecture of governance.The International Commission on Intervention and StateSovereignty (ICISS, 2001) report “The responsibility toProtect” is now a pivotal document on human rights inInternational Relations and stipulates the sovereigntytranslating to responsibility to protect, promote and fulfil.In practice when a State is unwilling or unable to protect thehuman rights of its citizens it automatically yields itsresponsibility and sovereignty to the international level.This makes the co-existence contradictory as there is evidenceof complicated, uneasy relations yet based on recentdevelopments it has been also workable. The Paris Principleson National Human Rights Institutions stipulates thatindependent national agencies shall be established withinGovernments with the sole mandate to hear concerns, advise,recommend, proposals, promote and ensure harmonization ofnational legislation and reports on human rights matters togovernments, parliaments and any other competent body.

Actualization: Human Rights, the Arab Spring and State relations hereafter

“I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society……it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die”, H.E Nelson Mandela , Former president of South Africa

While realists and liberalists are at pains to explain andinterpret the Arab Spring, constructivists posit that the ArabSpring is a construct of the people of the Arab States. Theeventual respect, promotion and fulfillment of the humanrights of the citizens of these States shall be shaped by thepeople themselves. International relations from here on after

15

of these States shall be defined by the positions taken,timings and support the peoples of these Arab States receivedfrom specific international actors during their quest fortheir human rights and dignity.

The seizure of a cart that belonged to Mohamed Bouazizi thegrocery seller, by a policeman led to Bouazizi’s self –immolation in Tunisia setting into motion a series protests inTunisia and revolutions driven by frustration, desperation,injustice, inequality and marginalization of citizens inautocratic states of North Africa and Middle East. Theprotests in Tunisia quickly spread to Egypt, Algeria, Morocco,Syria, Bahrain, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

The protests rapidly spread led to demand for human rights foreach citizen therefore the calls for regime change,institutional overhaul, multi -party politics, democraticelections and media freedom depending on the each Government’shuman rights record, its handling of public affairs andfounding. The spread of the protests was anchored on theutility of mobile phones broadcasting, facebook, twitter andblogs amongst other social media to shape the agenda, mobilizeprotesters, document them, disseminate the minute to minuteexperiences of the protesters, receive feedback, coverGovernment response and monitor outcomes of respectiveGovernments’ interventions.

The initial responses of the ruling governments during theArab Spring police brutality, militarization, banning ofmedia, indiscriminate vast violations of human rights fromrape to outright cold blooded murder of protesting citizens inmajor cities and rural areas, announcements of state ofemergencies, defections of military officers, Ambassadorsamongst other Government Officials in support of the citizens’demands, followed by denial of such acts by the Governmentsand shifting of blames to disloyal agents of foreign masters.

16

With intensified and rapidly spreading citizens’ protests theGovernments across the country, weakening military and policeforces due to defections, disagreements in the Governments,and recognition of protesting citizens’ representatives by theinternational community. Increasing internal and externalpressure led to the ouster and arrest of Egyptian PresidentHosni Mubarak, the murder of Libyan President Muammar Gaddafion 20 October 2011 as well as the ceding of concessions by amajority of Presidents in the Region.

Some of the concessions included the 14 January 2011 steppingdown and fleeing to Saudi Arabia of President Zine el –Abidinde Ben Ali, 1 February 2011 King Abduallah’sdissolution of government and appointment of former armygeneral Marouf al Bakhit to create a new cabinet, televisedannouncements on 1 and 2 February 2011 by Presidents HosniMubarak of Egypt and Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen decliningfrom vying for presidential seats in the then upcomingelections, 24 February 2011 Algerian President AbdelazizBouteflika lifts emergency rule that was in place since 1992,1 June 2011 Bahraini King Hamad bin Isa promises unconditionalreform talks starting July 2011 and on 29 July approvesparliamentary reforms democratizing the political system inBahrain, 1 July 2011 a popular constitutional referendum heldand passed in Morocco to limit the influence of King MohammedIV, Egyptian Elections that begun on 21 November 2011 and thescheduling of national elections for 2013 in Qatar.

Whilst each respective Arab Government had a unique reactionbased on its respective circumstance, the other non -ArabLeague and international agencies were caught by surprise,could not decide what common position and action to take whenthe clashes between citizens and government forces commencedin Tunisia. They were even more perturbed and could not find acommon voice or coordination when the Arab spring rapidlycommenced spreading across the Region. Some of the Countriesstrategically embraced “a wait and see” approach as the human

17

rights of the protestors were being violated and atrociouscrimes committed. Some of these reactions from some of theGovernments and International Organizations included the needto protect their national interests in the diverse Arab Stateswithout appearing to be directly ignoring the human rightsdemands of the protestors. The protestors in each respectiveArab State noticed these actions or inactions of foreignstates and commenced attacking foreign missions and callingfor proactivity and intervention of the international actors.Protestors also criticized, issued warnings and threats toforeign governments and institutions that would engage inactions or inactions as well as commissions or omissions aimedat averting or undermining their quest for human rights andregime change in their countries.

In the midst of the protests, International institutions andexternal governments found themselves at cross roads andcaught in between the demands of the citizenship, the need toprotect human rights and the governments of Arab SpringCountries. External governments and international institutionshad to make critical choices that could permanently ruin orenhance their relations with the respective countries of theArab Spring. Some of those foreign policy choices and actionsare reflected below.

Date Country / Institution

Foreign policy choices and actions

11 Feb 2011 Egypt Days before 11 Feb 2011 USA makes several statements alluding to the resignation of H.E. Hosni Mubarak and Mubarak resigns on 11 Feb 2011

22 Feb 2011 Libya H.E. Muammar Gaddafi delivers a speech blaming USA, Al-Quaeda and almost the entire Western world for the protests in

18

Libya. This swings international actors towards enhancing ties with the National Transitional Council (NTC) and the protestors

10 Mar 2011 France France is the first country to recognize the NTC as the legitimate government of Libya

17 Mar 2011 UN Security Council

Votes in favour of resolution 1973 for a no-fly-zone over Libyan air-space, disabling H.E Gaddafi’s air force. Brazil,China, Germany, India and the Russian Federation abstain from the vote

26 April 2011

UN, USA and Britain

UN secretary General Ban Ki Mon calls for killings by Syrian security forces. USA and Britain are considering imposing sanctions on Syria

1 May 2011 Libya Pro-Gaddafi forces attack embassies and UNlocations in Tripoli. The Gadddafi government is condemned by Britain, USA and Italy among others.

2 May 2011 Switzerland

Swiss banks freeze H.E. Gaddafi’s assets valued at EURO 260 million

3 May 2011 Turkey Tayyip Erdogan, Turkish Prime Minister urges H.E.Gaddafi to quit his actions and is criticized for not taking action earlier

4 May 2011 Egypt Hamas and Fattah, both Palestinian Organizations under mediation by Egyptian Government agree to peacefully reconcile. Egypt’s mediation is viewed as an aversionby the Israeli Government to destabilize it and the region.

28 May 2011 Egypt In a departure from Mubarak’s policy, the Rafah border crossing with Gaza is

19

reopened by Egypt allowing citizens of Gaza to cross the border for the first time in 4 years straining relations with Israel, who fear military personnel and materials will be availed to Hamas fighters in Gaza

7 June 2011 Spain Spain’s foreign minister Trinidad Jimenez announces Spain recognizes NTC oas representative of the Libyan government

9 June 2011 NATO NATO admitted to missing target over Tripoli, Libya, causing discontent amongstnations

2 July 2011 African Union

African Union decide not to execute the ICC arrest order on H.E. Gaddafi

3 July 2011 Turkey Turkey acknowledged NTC as the ruling bodyin Libya

16 July 2011 USA USA recognizes NTC of Libya

26 July 2011 Israel Israel’s President H.E Shimon Peres, officially calls on Syrian President Bashel el Assad to resign

3 Aug 2011 UN Security Council

UN Security Council condemns the violence on civilians being perpetrated on behalf of the Syrian regime

15 Aug 2011 Turkey Turkey’s foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu issues a last warning to the Syrian regime

13 Sept 2011 World Bank World Bank recognizes the National Transitional Council of Libya

14 Nov 2011 Turkey Turkey threatens to cut electricity to Syria as at least 90ppl are killed in anti- Assad demonstrations. Arab League, USA, EU and others call for tightening of sanctions on Syria

25 Nov 2011 UN UN Committee against Torture accused 20

Committee against Torture

Syrian regime of abducting and torturing children.

2 Dec 2011 European Union

EU is unable to secure a consensus on sanctions towards Syria and Sweden is blamed for blocking the sanctions due to the Swedish Telecom company Ericsson whichis highly involved in the Syrian Market -the “Ericsson factor”

16 Dec 2011 Russia , UN Security Council

Russia that had earlier been averse to using harsh language against Syria, circulated a draft resolution on Syria at the UN Security Council

Adopted from http://www.conflictdatabase@pcr.uu.se

Lessons learnt

From my readings on human rights in international relations, Icomprehend the international human rights regime was notprevalent between 1945 when the UN system was formed and the1970s owing to the cold war. Subsequent to 1970, the world didnot only witness the end of the cold war but also the worstabuses of human rights in nations such as Somalia, DemocraticRepublic of Congo, Rwanda, Bosnia and East Timor amongstothers, some of which continue to date. Currently, in theadvent of the war on terror, previous human rights championssuch as USA, Britain and others are now being challenged ontheir negative human rights practices, therefore the need foreternal vigilance on human rights.

21

I have also learnt the difference between normative andempirical study of human rights to be how human rights aretheorised and practiced respectively as well as the embodimentof human rights regimes as we know them is anchored on thepolitical liberalism.

The implementation of any established human rights regime ishighly be driven by the good will of political actors, thepolitical context, interpretations and circumstances. Thedemand of human rights regimes is also driven by negotiationsof the various political agendas of amongst interested groups,individuals and states as well as their constituencies seekingto defeat and replace existing unjust power structures andsituations.

In relation to the human rights in the context ofInternational Relations, I now comprehend that realists affirmthat national interest will always triumph and trump theinsertion of human rights in foreign policy formulation andthat human rights can only serve foreign policy and not viceversa. Liberalism on its part posits the continuous increaseof Human Rights in International Relations and anchors thisclaim on the increasing acceptance of a global human rightsregime and the spread of liberal democracy. On the other handconstructivists posit that respect for human rights isbecoming a significant foundation in the forming of stateidentities and an emergent standard for legitimate statehood.

I have also learnt that different theoretical schools ofthought in international relations perceive human rightsdifferently though they are studying one subject namely, humanrights.

I have also learnt there is need to the evolution of a newsystem that can ensure that all rights and the dignity of allpersons of whatever origin are protected, promoted andfulfilled at all times irrespective of circumstances.

22

Conclusion

“When I gave food to the poor, they called me a Saint.When I asked why the poor were hungry, they called me aCommunist”, Dom Helder Camara, Brazilian Roman CatholicArchbishop, author and Nobel Peace Prize nominee.

The human rights framework emphasizes the need to secure ahuman commonality and shared humanity at all levels ofgovernance and human contact. Human rights are experienceswhether positive or negative that an individual or group ofpersons goes through each moment of their live. Noting thatthe human rights discourse continues to be manipulated toserve profit or power, human rights will continue to be a keysource of contestation in an effort towards securing them.

Currently debates and issues that tend to undermine therespect, protection and fulfilment of human rights are the“war on terror”, the global rise of fundamentalism, the socalled human enhancement technologies and the spirallingeconomic globalization in the scramble of natural resources.The existing human rights framework is still inadequate toaddress the challenges above, with many millions ofundignified life experiences, people’s rights beingunfulfilled and unprotected.

Defending human rights requires bold examination of theideological, systemic and structural hindrances that areundermine human rights fulfilment and enjoyment. Human rightsdefending will also require expansion from the efforts toentrench laws, policies and institutions to include efforts todefend the idea of human rights from legitimacy and viabilitychallenges.

23

This expansion will be in the application of human rights innew communities , cultures and geographic regions as the humanrights framework itself expands and humanity endeavours toachieve universalism and its aspirations. Its for this reasonthat at the global arena social, economic, environmentalrights (SEERs) including the right to development are poisedto prominently be sites of contestation in this era ofglobalization. Increasingly attention and focus is on theinstitutionalization and practice of the principles on theimplementation of the International Covenant on EconomicSocial and Cultural Rights (1986) and Maastricht Guidelines onthe Violations of Economic and Social Cultural Rights. Thisincreasing attention can be evidenced in the strengthening andrapid presence of SEERs focused social movements such as theWorld Social Forum. It is worth noting that, human rightspolitics will also continue expanding with the advancing ofhuman rights as a dominant and central pillar of progressivepolitics across the world.

The complexity and tensions of the political dimensions,actors, institutional inadequacies, incapacities incoordination and the ideological question challenginguniversalism will continue to determine if the promise ofdignified life amongst all peoples will be realized.

There is therefore the need for sustained and enhanced systemand commitment as well as strengthening of political will forhuman rights driven foreign policy, scholarly work on humanrights in international relations, national, internationalinstitutions and agents to entrench effective laws, policies,programmes, redress and reporting mechanism that can deliveron the fulfilment and enjoyment of dignity amongst allpeoples.

There is urgent and critical need for a radical shift fromthe mind -set, culture and society that promotes the thinkingthat only specialized human rights laws and agencies are

24

responsible or human rights fulfilment and enjoyment butrather to a mind-set, culture and society that is committed toentrenching the idea that each governmental institution, eachbureau and each service provider has a role, responsibilityand mandate to promote, respect and fulfil the human rights ofeach person.

“I am not interested in picking up crumbs of compassion from the table of someone who considers himself my master. I want the full menu of rights”, Bishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa

References

25

1. Amatrya Sen (2009), The Idea of Justice published byPenguin Books

2. Arturo Escobar (2012 paper back version), EncounteringDevelopment: The making and unmaking of the Third World,Princeton University press

3. Dan Bertznitz and Michael Murphree (2011) Run of the RedQueen: Government Innovation, Globalization and EconomicGrowth in China published by Yale University Press

4. Dilip Hiro (2010), After Empire: The Birth of a multi-power world by Nation books

5. Eugene Bardach (2009), A Practical guide in policyanalysis: The Eight fold path to more effective problemsolving third edition published by CQ Press

6. Jacob Bercovitch and Richard Jackson (2009), ConflictResolution in the 21st Century: Principles, Methods andApproaches published by University of Michigan Press

7. Jose Antonio Ocampo , Jan Kregel and Stephany Griffith –

Jones (2007), International Finance and Developmentpublished by United Nations

8. Joseph E. Stiglitz (2006), Making Globalization Workpublished by Penguin books

9. Manisuli Ssenyonjo (2009), Economic, Social and CulturalRights in International Law, Hart publishing

10. Michael Goodhart (2009), Human Rights: Politics andPractice, Oxford University Press

11. Michael Haas (2008), International Human Rights : Acomprehensive Introduction Routledge , Taylor and FrancisGroup

12. Oliver Daddow (2009), International RelationsTheory published by SAGE

26

13. Rhona K.M. Smith (2010), International Human Rights4e, published by Oxford University Press

14. Sheldon Leader and David Ong (2011), Global ProjectFinance, human rights and sustainable developmentpublished by Cambridge University Press

15. http://www.conflictdatabase@pcr.uu.se

16. http://www.huss.exter.ac.uk

17. http://www.un.org

3.11. Self-EVALUATION CHECKLIST

Self-Assessment Checklist to determine the worth of yourassignments

______ I have a cover page quite similar to the sample oneither Page 5 or on Page 6 of the Supplement.

______ I included a table of contents with a correspondingpage number for each item.

______ I followed the outline proposed on pages 7 & 13 of theSupplement with all or most sub-titles.

______ The length of my introduction and my conclusion iscommensurate with the size of my document.

______ I used references throughout the document as suggestedon page 8 of the Supplement.

______ My references are listed in alphabetical order at theend as suggested on page 8 of the Supplement.

______ Every title mentioned in the text appears in my listof references or vice-versa.

______ I have a detailed illustration of the point of view Iam trying to defend.

27

______ I used diagram to further clarify my ideas.

______ I have at least 15 pages of text except if advisedotherwise

______ Every section of my document followed a logicalsequence (chapter 1, 2, 3…)

______ I included a section consisting of unbiasedrecommendations and/or suggestions about the topic.

______ I have avoided all fancy fonts, drawings, ordecorations.

______ I have used a simple, clear, and easy syntax that isaccessible to all.

______ I had a Spell-checker such as Microsoft Word (or other)review my text for spelling mistakes.

______ I had a Spell-checker such as Microsoft Word (or other)review my text for grammatical mistakes.

______ I have not infringed copyright laws by using materialfrom other individuals or institutions. I have acknowledgedall sources in my references

______ I hereby attest that the work I am submitting is 83%my own to the best of my knowledge except for the 17%references and sources I acknowledged.

Student: Hope Gertrude Muli

Signature:

28

Date: 17 April 2012

29