R2P, Human Rights, and the Perils of a Bad Human Rights Intervention

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 267-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Murdie
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Conflict ◽  
National Sample ◽  
Third Party ◽  
The Future ◽  
Peacekeeping Missions ◽  
Positive Force ◽  
Cross National

This article evaluates the effects certain interventions, namely various types of third party peacekeeping missions, have had on the future human rights practices of countries experiencing civil conflict. I argue that peacekeeping with (a) an un mandate or (b) a strong civilian or humanitarian focus are the only types of missions that should cause gains in human rights performance; these missions are aligned with R2P goals. Using a cross-national sample of countries experiencing civil conflict from 1960 to 2013, I find much evidence that R2P-aligned peacekeeping missions can be a positive force for future human rights performance within countries that have experienced civil conflict, even after we account for the factors that led to the mission in the first place. Advocacy efforts in support of R2P must be careful to call for only interventions with un support and/or clear humanitarian objectives.

Interventions and repression following civil conflict

2021 ◽  
pp. 002234332110108
Author(s):  
Naji Bsisu ◽  
Amanda Murdie
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Foreign Aid ◽  
Civil Conflict ◽  
Theoretical Argument ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Security Sector Reform ◽  
State Repression ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Peacekeeping Missions ◽  
International Interventions

Civil conflicts inevitably have negative consequences with regards to respect for human rights within affected states. Unfortunately, the violation of human rights often does not end with the conflict. What factors explain variation in state repression in post-civil conflict societies? Can international interventions, both civilian and military, improve human rights in states with a history of conflict? Does the size of the intervention matter? We argue that international interventions, including peacekeeping missions and officially directed foreign aid, can reduce physical integrity abuses. This process occurs by simultaneously increasing protections for civilians while also raising the costs of repression to both government leaders and their agents. Human rights abuses will also decrease when there are legal remedies available to vulnerable populations which are bolstered by a strong judicial system. A robust civil society can also discourage human rights abuses by shedding light on these events and providing human rights education. In line with our theoretical argument, we focus on UN peacekeeping missions, especially those with human rights teams, and officially directed foreign aid for legal and security sector reform and NGOs. Using both a treatment effects approach and a continuous dose–response model, we find much support for the implications of our argument.

Humane global governance—an area for the future where progress inches forward

2020 ◽  
pp. 935-939
Author(s):  
Richard Jolly
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Global Governance ◽  
Poverty Reduction ◽  
Civil Conflict ◽  
First Century ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Human Needs ◽  
The Future ◽  
Neoliberal Economics ◽  
Development Goals

This chapter argues that the twenty-first century requires humane global governance, well beyond current perspectives usually based on neoliberal economics. Humane global governance would give priority to human concerns and human rights; encompass the Sustainable Development Goals as key objectives; be focused on support for national and international priorities for human rights, poverty reduction, and diminishing extremes of inequalities. Global public goods should be defined and pursued in a humane way, emphasizing human needs in tackling such global threats as the transmission of communicable diseases, extremes of rapid migration, civil conflict, peace and human security—all key elements in human development. Examples are given as to how such approaches have been demonstrated by different UN agencies and how they can be built on for the future.

Popular Resource Sovereignty

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leif Wenar
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Good Reason ◽  
Resource Curse ◽  
Civil Conflict ◽  
Popular Sovereignty ◽  
State Sovereignty ◽  
The People ◽  
Rich Countries

Article 1 of both of the major human rights covenants declares that the people of each country “shall freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources.” This chapter considers what conditions would have to hold for the people of a country to exercise this right—and why public accountability over natural resources is the only realistic solution to the “resource curse,” which makes resource-rich countries more prone to authoritarianism, civil conflict, and large-scale corruption. It also discusses why cosmopolitans, who have often been highly critical of prerogatives of state sovereignty, have good reason to endorse popular sovereignty over natural resources. Those who hope for more cosmopolitan institutions should see strengthening popular resource sovereignty as the most responsible path to achieving their own goals.

Fundamental Rights and the Integrity of Union Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julio Baquero Cruz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Fundamental Importance ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Future ◽  
Political Understanding

This chapter analyses another area of Union law that is highly controversial and relevant in structural terms—the protection of fundamental rights. It discusses the scope and standard of the protection offered at Union level, the consequences for national law, and the implications of the future accession of the Union to the European Convention on Human Rights. These issues are of fundamental importance for the integrity of Union law and of wider significance for the political understanding of the Union.

Digital Authoritarianism and the Future of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Tiberiu Dragu ◽  
Yonatan Lupu
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Theoretic Model ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Human Rights Regime ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Future ◽  
Technological Developments ◽  
Game Theoretic ◽  
Strategic Context

Abstract How will advances in digital technology affect the future of human rights and authoritarian rule? Media figures, public intellectuals, and scholars have debated this relationship for decades, with some arguing that new technologies facilitate mobilization against the state and others countering that the same technologies allow authoritarians to strengthen their grip on power. We address this issue by analyzing the first game-theoretic model that accounts for the dual effects of technology within the strategic context of preventive repression. Our game-theoretical analysis suggests that technological developments may not be detrimental to authoritarian control and may, in fact, strengthen authoritarian control by facilitating a wide range of human rights abuses. We show that technological innovation leads to greater levels of abuses to prevent opposition groups from mobilizing and increases the likelihood that authoritarians will succeed in preventing such mobilization. These results have broad implications for the human rights regime, democratization efforts, and the interpretation of recent declines in violent human rights abuses.

scholarly journals The future of the European Union’s accession to the European Convention on Human Rights after Opinion 2/13: is it still possible and is it still desirable?

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 239-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobias Lock
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Eu Accession ◽  
The Future

EU Accession to the European Convention on Human Rights – Hurdles erected by Opinion 2/13 of 18 December 2014 – Analysis of soundness of the ECJ’s reasoning – Discussion of necessary changes to the Draft Accession Agreement – Criticism that not all obstacles can be removed by amending the Draft Agreement – Treaty change may be necessary – Question whether accession is worth it from a human rights perspective under these conditions

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document