The human rights international conventions and the forthcoming obligations of the state are regarded as the primary platform for the countries to cooperate with each other. In majority cases the states as the subjects of the international relations prefer to rely on the importance of the human rights obligations in order to achieve the desirable purpose in the negotiations. In this regard, the author has the purpose to consider the notion of the relevance of the human rights to the political negotiation in form of the particular good used by the states.
According to Evans Gareth, the international community has faced a lot of challenges in the last decade in order to respond to the infringement of the human rights obligations. There are a lot of conflicts within the world that undermines the safety of the living of the citizens so that the countries face the necessity to take the military actions for the resolution of the crisis rather that to draw the attention to the obligation to protect the human life and health. Besides there is a spread of the evident internal crisis of the United Nations which is the primary international organization for the maintenance of the peace and security in the world. Despite the fact that the international community is awaiting for the reformation of the activity of the organization, the process is not going to be launched. Therefore, the countries should personally observe the compliance of the human rights obligations by the other states regardless of the external assistance. Accordingly, given the development of the globalization in almost every sphere of the life of the individual, the countries should acts on compliance with the principle "R2P" as the responsibility to protect. Based on this notion, the state should pursue the limits as to the legal humanitarian intervention and assistance to the other states (Evans).
The state should act for the prevention of the severe attacks at the civilian population. In this regard, the author notes the example with Kosovo intervention. It is a clear fact that the intervention to this theory caused several biased attitude due to the legitimate status of this action. However, the activity of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty took the first place for the consideration of the legal basis of the intervention and its role for the protection do the human rights. Although, it should be said that in majority cases the states rely on the human rights pillars as the efficient justification tool that may explain any activity of the country regardless the consequences. However, today the countries request the United Nations and other international organizations to identify as to whether the protection of the human rights is the primary purpose of the activity of the country. In addition, the author stipulates that the humanitarian activity of the country should be implemented in the next three vital dimensions:
Prevention
Reaction
Reconstruction (Evans).
Meanwhile, the author emphasizes that the prevention should play the most important role in the identification of the measures of the country for the protection of the individual. In this regard, the states should have the collective responsibility addressing the violation of the human rights obligations within the world by any subject of the international relations.
In contrast, Seyla Benhabib states the position that the borders between the countries should have the universal character in terms of the provision the protection got be individual. She believes that any country should grant the necessary protection for the seekers of the asylum, refugees, immigrants. The author states that if the individual comes to new country, not the place of his origin, than this state may benefit the welfare of the individual and improve his living. Therefore, granting of the citizenship or the asylum in this states will have aim to improve the living conditions of the person what in fact represents the form of the protection of the human rights. Accordingly, the author highlights that any country may loose its sovereignty within the territory and its population in case it can not protect the citizens in the proper manner against the attacks or threats posed to the community. In this case, the political membership as the citizenship should not be taken into account by the other states as the main purpose should be the incorporation of the collective responsibility by granting protection to the people in need. At the same time, the author stipulates that the all the countries today face the problem of the resolution the coexistence upon the tension between the sovereign self-determination claims of the countries and the consecutive obligations under the human rights conventions. It is widely accepted that the states are loyal to the necessity to fulfill these obligations but recognition of the boundaries of each other, as to the territory and rights to execute personal policy, takes the same please in the society today. In addition, the people instead of the individuals as the different concepts from the perspective of the international law should decide upon the execution of the responsibility of the states and their actions. Therefore, the justice should have the global dimension so that to control the compliance with the rights of the people in fact and then to decide upon the fulfillment of the human rights obligations having the primary importance for the countries (Benhabib).
The other author in the paper "Colonialism And Human Rights, A Contradiction In Terms? The Case Of France And West Africa, 1895-1914", Conklin Alice draws attention to the evolution of the human rights as the object of the persistent cooperation between the countries. During the sixteenth century through the settlement of the colonies by several states as the British Empire, Spain, the leadership of these countries did not treat the people respectfully. The colonized came to the new territories with the purpose to expand the territories while the people were regarded as the objects necessary for the production of the goods used further in trade relations. Therefore, the acquisition of the power in the world was reflected in the expansion of the territories of the particular state while the military forces were increased. The rule of the law and its power was not significant due to the fact that the people were guided by the customs and the traditions elaborated within the centuries. The situation has changed after the Peace of Westphalia. The countries have decided that it is necessary to elaborate the legal norms of binding force over the countries in order to maintain the peace within the society. Moreover, the further creation of the League of Nations forced the countries to think over the usage of the diplomatic means for the resolution of the conflicts so that the welfare of the country and the individual can be improved. Therefore, the attitude of the society to the importance of the human rights as the valuable notion has been changed. By virtue of the recognition the necessity to protect the human rights, the country in the contemporary world tries to gain the power. This statement is confirmed by the fact that human rights are regarded as normative good in the relations between the countries. For example, one state may provide the humanitarian assistance for the country where the conflict takes place for the achievement of the particular consensus in the trade relations. Thus, the protection of the human rights by one state in form of the assistance may be seen as the leverage and powerful instrument for the formation of the relations between the countries. If one state can not provide the assistance to the native population in order to prevent the numerous deaths, the rest of the international community may adopt the measures for the interference in the jurisdiction of the country for the maintenance of the peach and legal order. Besides, the first country which will be a subject of the interference will be obliged to the other couturier for the provision of the humanitarian assistance (Conklin).
At the same time, Mandami Mahmood in his study "Responsibility To Protect Or Right To Punish" argues that the current process of the globalization undermines the essence of the relations between the sovereign states due to the existence of the responsibility to protect. Moreover, the author emphasizes the International Criminal Court leaves the room for the absence of the responsibility for the offensive actions towards the individual in the international dimension. It should be said that the sanctions for the violation of the particular norms and obligations are not strong and serious in order to prevent the exposure to the same activity to be taken on behalf of the other state. In addition, the absence of the penalties for the aggressive actions or coercion as it is noticed today in the several regions of the world does not influence the position of the offender state in the international arena. Furthemore, the four ties continue to maintain the trade relations and any other forms of the cooperation with each other regardless of the violation of the human rights principles. At the same time, the overwhelming amount of the countries have not ratified and signed the Rome Statute that may govern the process of the prosecution of the country for the violation of the international obligations. Therefore, it seems that theese countries would like to have the room for the exposure to the aggression or any other prohibited actions due to the fact that they can be justified as the necessary measures for the protection of the national population. Accordingly, the countries have the concerns not to become the member of the Rome Statute due to the international customary rules based on which no state can be bound by the rules and norms of the external agreement. Meanwhile, the author states that the compliance with the human rights provisions is directly linked to the decisions of the political parties coming to the power in the state. Therefore, the decision to protect particular rights and freedoms do not depend on the intention of the population, while it is driven by the objectives of the political troops. Thus, the approach as to the decision-making process should be changed so that to maintain the stability and legal framework in the international arena between the countries. Furthemore, the human rights as the normative good in the relations between the countries should be turned to the final goal of the activity of the countries rather then the instrument of the achievement of the political governance (Mamdani).
Meanwhile, in the paper "Savages, Victims, and Saviors: The Metaphor of Human Rights", the author draws attention to the fact that some people and nations are regarded as the savages and victims of the actions of the states due to the fact that the consequences of the impact of the particular decisions of the countries over the welfare of the population is not assessed. At the same time, the author states on the division between the victims, savages and saviors as the elements of the human rights. The protection of the human rights obligations is regarded as the movement launched by the states in order to gain the power in the world. Moreover, the existence of the savages-victims-saviors represents the construction of the dimension for the activity of the states under the premises of the international protective organizations as the United Nations. Meanwhile, the author draws attention to the fact that the follower of the promotion of the protection of the human rights should act from the position of the individual and his needs which should be satisfied. In addition, the main idead of the study of the author is that the human rights movement should be based on the developments taking place in the framework of the contemporary world. In this respect, the human rights will serve the role of the changing good used for the maintenance of the lega international order and resolution of the global imbalances between the countries in terms of the savages-victims-saviors link. Therefore, despite the fact that the movement towards the protection of the human rights is spreading within the wolrd, its pillars should be improved in order to satisfy all the participants covered by this movement (Mutua).
Works Cited
Benhabib, Seyla. The Rights Of Others. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Print.
Conklin, Alice L. "Colonialism And Human Rights, A Contradiction In Terms? The Case Of France And West Africa, 1895-1914". The American Historical Review 103.2 (1998): 419. Web.
Evans, Gareth J. The Responsibility To Protect. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2008. Print.
Mamdani, Mahmood. "Responsibility To Protect Or Right To Punish?". Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 4.1 (2010): 53-67. Web.
Mutua, Makau."Savages, Victims, and Saviors: The Metaphor of Human Rights," Harvard International Law Journal 42 (2001): 201-245. Web.
