A significant theme resonates within the political challenges of this discussion of international norms and human rights and they seem to exist in the process of socialization, or the process of creating a collective understanding of the identities we take on. I believe that such a term is related to 'modes of person-hood', as noted by professor Jackson, in that society affirms ones ability to ascribe to rule consistent behavior. According to Keck and Sikking, moral consciousness-raising by the international human rights community often involves a process of shaming and norm-violating states are denounced as pariah states that do not belong to the community of civilized nations. Why is it that actors identities in the global normative sphere inherently rely on 'us' versus 'them' distinctions to substantiate claims of normality? And, to what extent do governments that wish to maintain their leadership roles suggest that enemy regimes have to become 'Hester Prynned' (for a lack of better words) on the international stage? Nevertheless, the dominating spheres of influence have taken on the titles of free-nation bearing societies as part of their perceived identity as leadership figures. I suspect that issues of human rights and terrorism are often publicly validated based on norm compliance, so as to make sense of international pressures to reform behaviors according to moral codes or customs that are acceptable to a select powerful few. To elucidate even further, here are a couple examples of international pressures to enact reforms:
1. Russia, Somalia, and North Korea have been the subject of wide global criticism and shaming campaigns through media outlets, NGO groups (ex. Amnesty Intl), and the United Nations have contributed to global conversations that center around human rights, war crimes, and much more.
We've all witnessed the recent US efforts to calm tensions between Russia and Ukraine. In the case of Russia the United States and the EU imposed sanctions to disable Putin's infiltration of Crimea. Vladimir Putin seemed highly dismissive of the concerns held by the Obama Administration and the sanctions imposed thereafter, as such the boundary overstepping continued. It's significant to note the way in which international sanctions have backfired in the past. Rebecca Adler-Nissen, an opponent of imposing sanctions in shaming campaigns, suggests that the resulting condition of being isolated may "boost national pride and a country's sense of cohesion".
2. Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) present in east, yet Somalia has received the stamp of global public shame for this issue. Social obligation of values of chastity, womanhood that are in
opposition to normative conceptions of female body image and agency over
the body. Indeed, it is also the case that Somalia has one of the highest, most consecutive record for FGM as a cultural norm in Africa. But, is the issue ascribed to just African countries and are victims and facilitators of FGM found in coastal African countries? Absolutely not the case; however, the shame campaigning of the last few decades would make an outsider believe otherwise. UNICEF reports confirm that the prevalence of FGM exists in Southeast and central Asia, not to mention the nearby Middle eastern countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
Although there are those that will argue that global shaming results in higher rates of accountability, I posit that the politics of shaming builds false confidence in fighting for human rights.
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/3/shame-russia-sanctionsdontwork.html
http://www.unicef.org/protection/57929_69881.html
Great examples Greg!
ReplyDelete