Essay on Human Rights Is Not A Symbol Of International Relations

857 Words Dec 6th, 2016 4 Pages
To begin with, human rights has failed in terms of international law. Human rights are defined as “the existence of rights that all human beings possess that even one’s own government cannot infringe on or deny and then can be protected by external elements, as through the United Nations.” There are 30 provisions in the Declaration of Human Rights that was passed on December 10th, 1948 by the United Nations General Assembly. However, not many of these are seen as universal. Most of these provisions depend on state interpretation, which relies on culture, norms, beliefs, history, etc. Realists would argue that human rights are not a symbol of international relations. Human rights are seen as an internal affair or a state matter. Liberalists would favor the United Nations and its human rights authority. They would see that to not acknowledge human rights would be problematic. Constructivists would say that things change over time. The emphasis of human rights clearly demonstrates a change of norms in order to accept the idea of human rights.
The first controversy with human rights is the issue of state sovereignty. “Sovereignty implies the existence of a government that claims complete authority to regulate virtually everything and everybody within its borders.” States see themselves as their own policy makers and enforcers. They do not see any other state or mechanism in place as more important than the laws already placed in the state of question. States are also more…

Related Documents