Report Summary: Human Rights Diplomacy: Navigating an era of polarization

Human Rights Diplomacy: Navigating an era of polarization
By David Griffiths

Since the concept of human rights was written into the 1945 UN Charter over 75 years ago, the termhuman rights diplomacy has been used to describe the interactions among states concerning human rights. These interactions have generated a human rights system which has been used to address violence and crises throughout the world. Previously, the idea of human rights was shaped by large powers, with strong Western influence guiding the human rights system. Now, new leadership and ideas for human rights are emerging from the Global South, presenting diverse considerations and new possibilities for collaboration
across hemispheres.

This research paper provides both an extensive analysis of the history of human rights diplomacy and an overview of current trends and challenges facing human rights practitioners. It details how the original conception of human rights emerged and the unacknowledged role of Global Southern states and states undergoing decolonization in its conception. The paper recounts how events like the Tiananmen Square Massacre, 9/11, and the US war in Iraq shaped the world order and contributed to the increasing polarization of the human rights system. Particularly, it notes the historical use of human rights as a tool to further individual countries’ political agendas and how this is still a challenge policymakers must overcome today.

The paper outlines four specific dynamics that are pertinent in human rights diplomacy in the modern era.
These include:

1. Polarization: With the increasing bipolarity of modern international politics comes rising
   polarization of conceptions of human rights. Practitioners claim that such tensions aren’t unusual, but have become increasingly harder to balance. In this system, it has become more difficult for less powerful states to make their voices heard, for fear of retaliation, despite the critical need for such declarations in discussions about human rights policy.
2. China’s Systematic Challenge: As China continues to become more powerful, it is also seeking to recalibrate the human rights system to align with its own interests. Backed by intense lobbying in the UN and a network of smaller supporting states, China has so far been largely successful in avoiding human rights accountability. The paper suggests that states looking to respond should do so with an ambitious global strategy that focuses on the interests of China’s allies, rather than narrowly focusing on China itself.
3. Economic Sanctions: Wealthy states are increasingly turning to targeted sanctions against
   offending states, but it is unclear whether such measures are effective. Particularly, legislation like the US’s Magnitsky legislation, which allows leaders to block assets of offending foreign entities, can be easily sidestepped and may be politically driven.
4. Emerging Global South Presence: There are increasing signs of a more diverse human rights agenda emerging from states in the Global South which have previously had little influence on the agenda. These states are highlighting issues such as climate change and the environment, the legacies of colonialism and racism, and economic inequality. This means more opportunities for cooperation between the EU and the Global South on human rights policy and ideas.

Finally, the paper sets out recommendations for how diplomacy can play a key role in advancing human rights in the future. It stresses that states that desire to preserve human rights gains or address its long-standing challenges must support the emerging diversity resulting from the stronger involvement of the Global South.

Read more here.