Premium
The Dilemma of Double Standards in U.S. Human Rights Policy
Author(s) -
Turner Scott
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
peace and change
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1468-0130
pISSN - 0149-0508
DOI - 10.1111/1468-0130.00274
Subject(s) - human rights , political science , international human rights law , law , legitimacy , dilemma , right to property , opposition (politics) , humanitarian intervention , fundamental rights , commission , international community , public administration , sociology , politics , philosophy , epistemology
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.