Title
WHAT SHOULD BE A LEGITIMATE ISSUE AGENDA CONCERNING HUMAN RIGHTS IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS?
The interconnectedness in the world produces a new agenda of international issues which affect both powerful and less powerful countries (Lamy, 2001a, 2006b: 213). The effects are widespread, and these problems could only be solved through international cooperation (Greene, 2006: 452). This paper seeks to consider four issues which are legitimate to the human rights agenda in international relations.
Scholars of international relations and human rights argue from different perspectives on a vast range of policy issues. These encompass: global environmental concerns (including nuclear issues); the epidemiology of HIV/AIDs; legal and
…show more content…
In 2003, as the disease became more widespread, 2.3 million people died (Saul, 2005: 151). By 2006, about 40 million people had contracted the disease including children. Ninety per cent of those with HIV/AIDs are living in developing countries; 63 per cent of the carriers of HIV/ AIDS are from the Sub-Saharan Africa. 6,000 Africans die and 11,000 people are infected every day. Many people living with the disease are poor, and they cannot obtain sufficient maintenance drugs. Although, the drugs prices have been reduced to an affordable amount for people to buy but it should be understood that many of the HIV/AIDS carriers cannot earn money to buy these drugs, either because they are not sufficiently healthy to work or because they cannot gain employment due to discriminations. Another effect on the people living with this disease is the increasing prices of food and commodities in most of the developing countries (UNMDGs, 2009), because the people living with HIV/AIDS need a balanced diet to sustain their health, but when hunger persists, they tend to die earlier. Lack of access to public health services and drugs for carriers of HIV/AIDS has negative effects on long-term economic growth as many people of working age are unable to be economically active. Health is more than a result of development; it is a crucial means to achieve development (Global Issues, 2010).
Nigeria is a case in point, because it is ranked the second population of people
“Ideas about human rights have evolved over many centuries. But they achieved strong international support following the Holocaust and World War II. To protect future generations from a repeat of these horrors, the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 and invited states to sign and ratify it”
Human rights are rights innate to every single individual, whatever our nationality, where you live, sex, national or ethnic birthplace, color of skin, religion, dialect/language, and many more. We are all similarly qualified for our human rights without segregation. These rights are altogether interrelated, associated and resolute. Widespread human rights are regularly communicated and ensured by law, in the types of treaties, standard global law, general standards and different wellsprings of international. International human rights law sets down commitments of Governments to act in certain routes or to cease from specific acts, keeping in mind the end goal to advance and secure human rights and central flexibilities of people or
Human rights - they are an ongoing issue in the world today, with the constant struggle against violation. The United Nations has accepted 30 articles on human rights, which help protect millions from political, social, and legal abuses (UDHR). Even with the insistence from the world’s leaders to follow and honor these rights, violation is common and provides a serious threat to people all over the world. One example of a violation of human rights such as equality and safety in possessions is shown through the issue of Japanese American internment camps (UDHR).
Human rights seem to be one of the most undervalued rights that people are given. Although not tangible, or even visible, in the end they are one of the most significant aspects of life (Universal 1). They keep us civil. As the
On a global political stand point there was a uniting of ideas and governments; what we know today as the United Nations (UN). One of the main ideas which the UN has grown up around is ‘The individual possess rights simply by virtue of being Human’ (The Universal Declaration of human rights); which was adopted by the general assembly in 10th December 1948. This statement is reflect in the core principles
It was “solemnly” proclaimed that “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UNDHR] states a common understanding of the peoples of the world concerning the inalienable and inviolable rights of all members of the human family and constitutes an obligation for the members of the international community” . The UNDHR gave value to the term ‘human rights’, stressing the value of human dignity. However, the article also recognises the need for social order, Article 29 acknowledges that limits to these rights must be determined by law and can only be for the purposes of securing recognition and respect of others and to meet “the just requirements of morality, public order, and the general welfare in a democratic society”. Any restriction on these rights has to be justified as proportionate to the aims pursued by the restriction, for example, a police officer is justified in wielding a firearm against an individual deemed to be putting other lives in
human rights.21 While opponents of international law argue that it is all “mere window dressing.”22 According to Hathaway, States ratify treaties symbolically to show other States that they accept the principles of human rights but they rarely change their practices because of their obligations in the treaty.23 Based on a study of the ICCPR, Linda Keith argued that, “it may be overly optimistic to expect that being a party to this international covenant will produce an observable direct impact”. 24These findings raise the question as to whether human rights law regime is at all effective in protecting individual human rights. Whether the lack of adherence to human rights obligations indicates
This article is relevant in the context of increasing global concern over human rights. More recent debates in international relations discuss the importance of the individual over that of states and sovereignty, especially in a society in which national and global boundaries are being transcended and constantly undermined. Multiple levels
In international politics power tends to rise above everything else because after the war human rights became an issue. The idea of human rights comes from moral beliefs and principles, entitled specifically to individuals. After World War I, nations were still trying to settle down and establish their powers. At the end of World War II, efforts in attempting to institutionalize and implement new human rights occurred. The construction of human rights is a global challenge which are trans-regional, nation states cannot resolve on their own, and needs collective action from states. Human rights are made up of material needs which are a part of the societal needs and moral needs. Some rights are more universal compared to the others such as slavery, sexual orientation, or persecution. Culture variation is one factor that changes among different countries. The question here is, how does human rights relate to international politics? There are several connections between human rights and international politics. One connection is that states must work together to establish these rights to create the balance of power for individuals even through the culture differences. Human rights suggest a universal morality because of the shared ideas of moral principles and the ideas of the natural law. In discovering the principles to human rights morality was very important during the process because those principles served as a guide to the society’s behavior. The importance of morality in this situation is states must work together to form these rights for the people to create a balance of power and
Human rights are universal, inherent, inalienable and equal. These are entitlements held simply by virtue of being born as a human being, they are natural in the sense that their source is natural law and human nature (Donnelly 1982). It has developed throughout history due to oppressed people across the world pushing for change. In global politics the role of individual states or governments are crucial in upholding human rights through laws and legislations. However, due to economic and political factors, such as a lack of money or tension between governing bodies, some states do not have the power or resources to uphold human rights. This is where the media, the people, NGOs, and individuals, such as celebrities who have a powerful standing & audience, help in upholding and protecting the rights of people.
The concept of human rights has become ambiguous, with very little agreement regarding its meaning and application internationally. The concept of human rights could be deemed as what Gallie termed as “an essentially contested concept.” This argues that when it comes to certain concepts there is just simply no one clearly definable general use that is widely agreed on. There are a variety of elements and words that can be used to describe the concepts of human
The purpose of this project is to build on the existing literature regarding the International Human Rights regimes, with the goal of bridging a gap between the diffusion of international norms and changes in domestic respect for human rights. Due to a lack of formal enforcement mechanisms, it is difficult to punish states that violate its citizen’s human rights. One solution is to examine the role of international norms that are established and promoted via international treaties and organizations. If international norms are working, we should expect to see a process of diffusion taking place; states would improve their respect of human rights over time, but also in respect to their neighboring states. This would increase the global level
Although ninety-five percent of people living with HIV/AIDS are in developing countries, the impact of this epidemic is global. In South Africa, where one in four adults are living with the disease, HIV/AIDS means almost certain death for those infected. In developed countries however, the introduction of antiretroviral drugs has meant HIV/AIDS is treated as a chronic condition rather than a killer disease. In developing countries like South Africa, the drugs that allow people to live with the disease elsewhere in the world, are simply too expensive for individuals and governments to afford at market price.
Human rights are universal rights that we are entitled to. It is a freedom that is guaranteed based on the principle of respect for an individual. As mentioned in the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, human rights are a “recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all member of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world” (Kent, page 80). When asked what our rights are, we tend to get different answers and meanings. Some people recite the rights that they know; but let’s face it, not everyone knows all of the rights that they truly have. The rights we have consist of many things such as the right of having an adequate food supply. The right to
The United Nations is widely regarded and respected as the most powerful institution that promotes international cooperation and human rights action. In theory, actions implemented by and within the United Nations are based on the mutual global goal of protecting international human rights and preventing human sufferings. These actions are constituted through three main mechanisms: the Treaty-based system, the Human Rights Council, and Security Council and Humanitarian Interventions, with the level of confrontation and seriousness in each mechanism increases respectively. While aimed to serve the mutual goal of protecting human rights over the world and have shown some successes, in a world of sovereignty, actions when implemented are in fact grounded by the national interests of each state, including embracing its national sovereignty, concreting its strategic relationships with other states, and enhancing its reputation in the international community. This paper will analyze the successes and failures of each of the three mechanisms of the United Nations regime, through which it aims to prove that when it comes to actions, states focus more on their national, and in some cases, regional interests than on the mutual goal of strengthening human rights throughout the world, thus diminishing the legitimacy of the whole United Nations system.