As the US prepares to take the war on terrorism to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's doorstep, the George W. Bush administration has repeatedly called attention to human-rights violations in Iraq. The Iraqi regime, Bush tells us, has engaged in torture and extrajudicial killing and keeps the Iraqi people from enjoying basic civil and political freedoms. Not once, however, has the president suggested that these problems might be addressed through the UN human rights treaty system -- a system through which Iraq has committed to abide by the very principles it is accused of violating.
Perhaps this is because the Bush administration, which has just opted out of the treaty creating the International Criminal Court, would rather not focus attention on UN treaties just now. Or perhaps it is because Iraq is far from alone in its disregard of its human rights treaty commitments. Whatever the reason, the apparent irrelevance of the human rights treaty system in current debates is a worrisome sign.
ILLUSTATION: MOUNTAIN PEOPLE
In the half century since the creation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the world community has created nearly 100 universal and regional human-rights agreements governing issues as diverse as discrimination against women, state-sponsored torture and the right of collective bargaining. Although these developments provide clear symbols of the world's ongoing commitment to protecting human rights, strikingly little is known about the true effectiveness of such treaties in achieving their goals.
My own recent research suggests that treaties are often not as effective as we might hope. Although countries that ratify treaties usually have better human rights records than countries that do not, countries with the worst human-rights records actually ratify many treaties as often as nations with the best practices. Indeed, half of the countries responsible for the most recent widespread cases of genocide, including Rwanda in 1994 and Yugoslavia in the early 1990s, had ratified the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
This was essentially the same rate of ratification found among countries that had committed no genocide. Moreover, violations of human rights treaties abound. Iraq, which just held an election in which Saddam was re-elected in an uncontested election with 100 percent of the vote, long ago ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. And Afghanistan, which under the Taliban prohibited women's participation in political or civic life, was and is a member of the Convention on the Political Rights of Women.
Of course, that some rogue states ratify human-rights treaties should not call the treaty system as a whole into doubt. Human-rights treaties serve to foster gradual improvements in human-rights practices in both nonratifying and ratifying countries through changes in shared understandings of what behavior is acceptable.
Torture was once considered acceptable state practice. It no longer is, thanks in part to the creation of several treaties that prohibit its use. Human-rights treaties may also have positive effects on ratifying countries over the long term, creating public commitments to which human-rights activists can point as they push nations to make gradual, if grudging, improvements down the road.
Nonetheless, after examining the practices of 166 countries over a 40-year period, I have found no clear evidence that the UN's human rights treaties have a direct measurable positive impact on the human-rights practices of individual countries that ratify them. Perhaps this should not be so surprising.
For the most part, human-rights treaties are poorly monitored and enforced, and those countries that join face little or no penalty for failing to match their rhetoric with action. In this context, it is perhaps to be expected that some countries might be tempted to use ratification to try to placate those pressing for improvements in human rights, thereby turning ratification into a substitute for real improvements in their practices.
What, then, should be done to make the human rights treaty system more effective? This question demands international attention. A first step toward strengthening the system would be to augment today's reliance on self-policing with a stronger system of independent expert monitoring. The more information we have about countries' human-rights practices, the harder it will be for them to get away with abuses. Above all, guardians of human rights must remain vigilant, viewing ratification of treaties not as the end of the struggle for human dignity, but as the beginning in an evolving campaign.
Oona Hathaway is a professor of law at Yale University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.