When reading Risee, Ropp, and Sikkink, I was very troubled by one of the sentences in which they began to introduce one of their main theses. After a bit of a preamble, this sentence appeared: "In sum, we argue that the diffusion of international norms in the human rights area crucially depends on the establishment and the sustainability of networks among domestic and transnational actors who manage who manage to link up with international regimes, to alert Western opinion and Western governments." Aside from the syntax of the sentence (which I find very vocally awkward), I was also irritated by the way in which the idea of Western knowledge of human violations was presented in a way which would suggest that this particular cognizance is a critical and righteous step toward the correction of such abuses. As if to say that the redemption of human rights abuses is a single-tracked and unstoppable train - and all of these steps must come in this order, and the process is always completed once started. Well what about when Western states are the violators?
This month, several Senators toured Guantanamo Bay Detention Center where the United States houses terrorism suspects, few of which will ever face trial or even be formally charged.[1] According to a recent Washington Post Article, there are currently 122 prisoners there. And that would be a shocking number, if we weren't even more startled by the previous high number held there - 779.[2] The authors of our articles discuss several key elements of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the first of which is the right to life. They go on to define this as "the right to be free from extrajudicial execution and disappearance." I can hardly think of a place where a human being can more "disappear" than Guantanamo Bay. And the extrajudicial nature in which it is occurring is truly in violation of the spirit of the Human Rights Declaration, among other treaties.
So the authors leave a huge hole in this sentence and the logic that follows. Western States commit human rights violations, too. Meaning that the violations are always known by these states; indeed they are premeditated, formulated, and executed by them. But that in no way begins a process that will lead to the end of such abuses. They continue under the guise of Western "know-how" and "greater good." In this way, I disagree with the authors and I think that this view of human rights violations as an occurrence seen strictly in the non-Western world is not only insulting and inaccurate, it is an undeniable catalyst to the atrocities seen in places like Guantanamo.
1. http://www.providencejournal.com/article/20150320/NEWS/150329827/13943
2. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/18/obama-guantanamo-bay-prison_n_6897502.html
Chelsey,
ReplyDeleteInteresting way to, if not challenge as least de-westernize, the boomerang model. Can you imagine instances where the group who has trouble breaking through and needs outside help is located in a western, democratic country? What might those instances look like?
Chelsey,
ReplyDeleteAs a slight rhetorical critique- there are much worse places to "disappear" than Guantanamo bay. The CIA is reported to have had numerous other detention facilities where human rights were not particularly important (see this graphic: http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/TortureCountriesLARGE5.png). Guantanamo Bay is less opaque than you would think, in comparison to the expansive western apparatus for extrajudicial interrogation and detainment. At least in Guantanamo Bay, they are officially detained, accounted for, and given some measure of representation (and a wet towel, apparently).
I don't disagree with you that the western governments are equally guilty of human rights abuses. The narrative of U.S. excesses in human rights and foreign policy is not unique or recent: Christopher Hitchens outlines alleged human rights violations perpetuated by U.S. policy in Bangladesh, Chile, East Timor, Kurdistan, etc.[1] One prominent perpetrator, Henry Kissinger, defended his actions by claiming that “a country that demands moral perfection in its foreign policy will achieve neither perfection nor security.” [2]
As Professor Shirk noted, there are definitely instances where a western group has trouble breaking through to achieve domestic reform, and required outside help. The ICJ case on Nicaragua vs United States may be a useful example. On this topic, Debra Liang-Fenton's book "Implementing U.S. Human Rights Policy: Agendas, Policies, and Practices," specifically Chapter 9 "First Do No Harm" provides valuable insights on the issue.
[1] Hitchens, Christopher. For the sake of argument: Essays and minority reports. Verso, 1994., p. 253
[2] Wawrytko, Sandra Ann, ed. The Problem of Evil: An Intercultural Exploration. Vol. 90. Rodopi, 2000., p. 176
I am not saying that there aren't worse human rights violations that Guantanamo. But the truth, at least for me, is that no matter how nice it is or isn't in these types of facilities, it is not the life that is chosen by any of the individuals there. If they are guilty, then that should be shown through trial. I was partly inspired to write this post after attending a discussion on American's campus the other night with several former Fulbright Scholars and one of them discussed juvenile detention in Mexico and how so many will spend years waiting trials that will never come. It occurred to me that this same practice is used by the US. And then I read this article about these Western notions of right and wrong, all I could think of was how hypocritical those notions are.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete