The Dilemma of Double Standards in U.S. Human Rights Policy

Bibliographic Data

ID11219569
AuthorsScott Turner (0000-0003-2735-3220, University of Montevallo, corresponding author)
Year2003
Volume28
Issue4
Pages524-554
Publication date2003-10-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenuePeace & Change (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0149-0508 • E-ISSN: 1468-0130
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/1468-0130.00274
OpenAlexW2112252129
LanguageEN
Citations received3

In May 2000 the United States was voted off of the United Nations Human Rights Commission. This reflected the frustration of much of the international community with the United States’ increasingly obstructionist approach to international institutionalism. The United States’ opposition to the proposed International Criminal Court (ICC) reflects its pursuit of double standards in human rights policy. Double standards are manifest in U.S. support for Israel and Turkey with their records of gross human rights violations. They likewise are discernable in the strategic motives behind the 1999 Kosovo intervention. The proposed ICC challenges the United States’ use of human rights rhetoric to pursue unilateral objectives by forging a more neutral means of prosecuting international justice. If the United States is to recover its status as the world's human rights leader, it must renew its commitment to multilateral institutionalism and must avoid double standards that undermine the legitimacy of human rights discourse

Commission · Dilemma · Fundamental rights · Human rights · Humanitarian intervention · International community · International human rights law · Legitimacy · Opposition (politics · Political science · Politics · Right to property · Sociology · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · International Law and Human Rights · Law · Public Administration · Torture, Ethics, and Law

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub