The things that make for peace: The purpose, promise, and peril of interfaith engagement

2017 ◽  
Vol 114 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-80
Author(s):  
Ken Sehested
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Religious Tradition ◽  
The United States ◽  
Common Word ◽  
Religious Identities ◽  
The Arab Spring ◽  
Jewish Intellectuals ◽  
Made In

In the early weeks of 2011, during the Arab Spring uprising, Egyptian blogger Nevine Zaki posted a photograph from Cairo’s Tahrir Square. It showed a group of people bowing in the traditional style of Muslim prayer, surrounded by other people standing hand-in-hand, facing outward, as a wall of protection against hostile pro-government forces. Zaki affixed this caption: “A picture I took yesterday of Christians protecting Muslims during their prayers.” Similar scenes, some ancient, some as recent as yesterday’s newspaper, can be referenced in numerous ways with a variety of religious identities. No religious tradition can claim a monopoly on compassionate courage, yet such stories are rarely headlined. This article will review some of the progress made in interfaith collaboration on issues of justice, peace, and human rights, beginning with a review of organizational breakthrough statements, like “Dabru Emet,” a document from Jewish intellectuals and rabbis affirming that “Jews and Christians worship the same God,” and “A Common Word Between Us and You,” by leading Islamic scholars and clerics, followed by multiple responses from Christian bodies. With these as evidence of closer interfaith orbits on a large scale, we then examine the purpose, promise and pitfalls of interfaith collaboration on the ground in regions and communities, especially in the United States.

Exceptionalism Again: The Bush Administration, the “Global War on Terror” and Human Rights

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 707-725 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemary Foot
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
The United States ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
British Government ◽  
Global War On Terror ◽  
Detention Facility ◽  
Guantanamo Bay ◽  
Global War ◽  
Made In

When former UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, gave his farewell address in December 2006, he expressed his dismay at the Bush administration's conduct during its anti-terrorist campaign. The United States had given up its vanguard role in the promotion of human rights, he averred, and appeared to have abandoned its ideals and principles. There have been many statements similar to this one made in the period since September 2001. Even close allies, such as the British government, for example, have called for the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility on the grounds that, as a symbol of injustice, it had tarnished the United States as a “beacon of freedom, liberty and justice.”

scholarly journals The Case for Foreign Electoral Subversion

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cécile Fabre
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
The United States ◽  
History Of ◽  
Democratic Elections ◽  
The Cold War

AbstractIt is widely alleged that President Putin's regime attempted to exercise influence on the 2016 U.S. presidential election. It is known that its Soviet predecessors funded Western communist parties for decades as a means to undermine noncommunist regimes. Similarly, the United States has a long history of interfering in the institutions and elections of its Latin American neighbors, as well as (at the height of the Cold War) its European allies. More recently, many believe that, absent U.S.-driven assistance, the Democratic Opposition of Serbia would have lost the 2000 Yugoslavian presidential election to Slobodan Milošević. As those examples suggest, attempting to subvert the democratic elections of a putatively sovereign country is a time-honored way of bending the latter's domestic and foreign policy to one's will. In this paper, I focus on the state-sponsored, nonviolent, nonkinetic subversion of nationwide elections (for short, subversion) through campaign and party financing, tampering with electoral registers, and conducting disinformation campaigns about candidates. I argue that, under certain conditions and subject to certain constraints, subversion is pro tanto justified as a means to prevent or end large-scale human rights violations.

The Logic of a Soft Intervention Strategy: The United States and Conflict Conciliation in Africa

2006 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 317-339
Author(s):  
Donald Rothchild
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
Intervention Strategy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
The Other ◽  
Coercive Diplomacy ◽  
Peace Agreements

AbstractWhat forms of U.S. intervention are likely to prove realizable and to be appropriate for facilitating the implementation of peace agreements and protecting human rights in Africa? The choices for action are certainly wider than the polar opposites of disengagement and large-scale military intervention. Because the United States can afford neither prolonged military hegemony nor the indulgence of neo-isolationism, it must find some form of creative engagement that fulfills its obligations to facilitate and protect in ways that are acceptable to both American and overseas opinion. Limited interests in Africa and the nature of public pressures leave little alternative to utilizing soft intervention approaches in most cases. Within the category of soft intervention, there appears to be a continuum of means leading to possible movement into muscular intervention. At one end, there is coercive diplomacy, which is associated with threats of military and economic sanctions; if these sanctions are actually used, the intervening state becomes involved in muscular intervention. At the other end is diplomacy associated not with threats, but with the promise of rewards. Between the two poles lies diplomacy that involves neither threats nor rewards (i.e., conciliation and mediation without the use of pressures and incentives). In real world contexts, third parties tend to apply mixed packages of non-coercive and coercive incentives, with coercive incentives becoming increasingly dominant as the costs of altering preferences and the intensity of conflict rise.

Revisiting the Place of Preparatory Documents in the Interpretation of Transformative Constitutions

ICL Journal ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-81
Author(s):  
Cecil Abungu
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
South Africa ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Radical Change ◽  
The United States ◽  
Empirical Examination ◽  
The People ◽  
Past Experiences ◽  
Made In

Abstract South Africa and Kenya are among some nations that have adopted what are referred to as ‘transformative constitutions’, with the aim of bringing about radical change that would repair the cumulatively deep fissures in their societies. In order to determine how to satisfactorily give these constitutions effect, judges may undertake to first understand the people’s past experiences and how that informed the constitutional provisions that were adopted. This will in turn allow them to grasp what sort of transformation the people sought. One of the sources by which to undertake such a task is preparatory documents. In this study, these are the materials detailing the people’s views on the then-prospective constitutional provisions and discussions during constitutional conferences. By reference to the United States courts as a case study, this article seeks to find out the use to which judges interpreting provisions in the Constitution of Kenya and the Constitution of South Africa put preparatory documents. It does so through an empirical examination of select Human Rights decisions in both jurisdictions. It eventually finds that the examination of preparatory documents need not necessarily be viewed as an exercise that will restrain a judge, or fold back progress that has been made in progressive adjudication. At the very least, it will help a judge understand the transformation sought while in some cases, it may legitimize and enlighten a judge’s decision to interpret a provision in a more expansive manner.

scholarly journals The Theory and Practice at the Intersection Between Human Rights and Humanitarian Law

2017 ◽  
Vol 111 (4) ◽  
pp. 1063-1074 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica Hakimi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Western Democracies

The United States is more than fifteen years into a fight against terrorism that shows no sign of abating and, with the change in administration, appears to be intensifying. Other Western democracies that have historically been uneasy about U.S. counterterrorism policies have, in recent years, shifted toward those policies. And armed nonstate groups continue to commit large-scale acts of violence in multiple distinct theaters. The legal issues that these situations present are not entirely new, but neither are they going away. Recent publications, like the three works under review, thus provide useful opportunities to reflect on and refine our thinking on them.

Quality Control of Data in a Large-Scale Cancer Register Program

1966 ◽  
Vol 05 (02) ◽  
pp. 67-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. I. Lourie ◽  
W. Haenszeland
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Quality Control ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
The United States ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Related Data ◽  
Cancer Register ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
End Results

Quality control of data collected in the United States by the Cancer End Results Program utilizing punchcards prepared by participating registries in accordance with a Uniform Punchcard Code is discussed. Existing arrangements decentralize responsibility for editing and related data processing to the local registries with centralization of tabulating and statistical services in the End Results Section, National Cancer Institute. The most recent deck of punchcards represented over 600,000 cancer patients; approximately 50,000 newly diagnosed cases are added annually.Mechanical editing and inspection of punchcards and field audits are the principal tools for quality control. Mechanical editing of the punchcards includes testing for blank entries and detection of in-admissable or inconsistent codes. Highly improbable codes are subjected to special scrutiny. Field audits include the drawing of a 1-10 percent random sample of punchcards submitted by a registry; the charts are .then reabstracted and recoded by a NCI staff member and differences between the punchcard and the results of independent review are noted.

Palestine Unbound

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 130-134
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Task Force ◽  
The United States ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Tel Aviv ◽  
The Us ◽  
Intention To Move ◽  
Arab Israeli Conflict ◽  
The U.S

This section, updated regularly on the blog Palestine Square, covers popular conversations related to the Palestinians and the Arab-Israeli conflict during the quarter 16 November 2017 to 15 February 2018: #JerusalemIstheCapitalofPalestine went viral after U.S. president Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and announced his intention to move the U.S. embassy there from Tel Aviv. The arrest of Palestinian teenager Ahed Tamimi for slapping an Israeli soldier also prompted a viral campaign under the hashtag #FreeAhed. A smaller campaign protested the exclusion of Palestinian human rights from the agenda of the annual Creating Change conference organized by the US-based National LGBTQ Task Force in Washington. And, UNRWA publicized its emergency funding appeal, following the decision of the United States to slash funding to the organization, with the hashtag #DignityIsPriceless.

Utopias of One

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Kotin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
World War I ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Jim Crow ◽  
Personal Autonomy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
Original Research ◽  
The Soviet Union

This book is a new account of utopian writing. It examines how eight writers—Henry David Thoreau, W. E. B. Du Bois, Osip and Nadezhda Mandel'shtam, Anna Akhmatova, Wallace Stevens, Ezra Pound, and J. H. Prynne—construct utopias of one within and against modernity's two large-scale attempts to harmonize individual and collective interests: liberalism and communism. The book begins in the United States between the buildup to the Civil War and the end of Jim Crow; continues in the Soviet Union between Stalinism and the late Soviet period; and concludes in England and the United States between World War I and the end of the Cold War. In this way it captures how writers from disparate geopolitical contexts resist state and normative power to construct perfect worlds—for themselves alone. The book contributes to debates about literature and politics, presenting innovative arguments about aesthetic difficulty, personal autonomy, and complicity and dissent. It models a new approach to transnational and comparative scholarship, combining original research in English and Russian to illuminate more than a century and a half of literary and political history.

Liberating Afghan Women

2004 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 70-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy Gallagher
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Organizations ◽  
Way Of Life ◽  
Afghan Women ◽  
The Media ◽  
Policy Priority

Public opinion in the United States and elsewhere celebrated the liberation of Afghan women following the defeat of the Taliban government. The United States promised to stay in Afghanistan and foster security, economic development, and human rights for all, especially women. After years of funding various anti- Soviet Mujahidin warlords, the United States had agreed to help reconstruct the country once before in 1992, when the Soviet-backed government fell, but had lost interest when the warlords began to fight among themselves. This time, however, it was going to be different. To date, however, conditions have not improved for most Afghan women and reconstruction has barely begun. How did this happen? This article explores media presentations of Afghan women and then compares them with recent reports from human rights organizations and other eyewitness accounts. It argues that the media depictions were built on earlier conceptions of Muslim societies and allowed us to adopt a romantic view that disguised or covered up the more complex historical context of Afghan history and American involvement in it. We allowed ourselves to believe that Afghans were exotic characters who were modernizing or progressing toward a western way of life, despite the temporary setback imposed by the Taliban government. In Afghanistan, however, there was a new trope: the feminist Afghan woman activist. Images of prominent Afghan women sans burqa were much favored by the mass media and American policymakers. The result, however, was not a new focus on funding feminist political organizations or making women’s rights a foreign policy priority; rather, it was an unwillingness to fulfill obligations incurred during decades of American-funded mujahidin warfare, to face the existence of deteriorating conditions for women, resumed opium cultivation, and a resurgent Taliban, or to commit to a multilateral approach that would bring in the funds and expertise needed to sustain a long-term process of reconstruction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document