Governments use human rights both as a tool and as an objective of foreign policy. The Role of Human Rights in Foreign Policy analyses conflicting policy goals such as peace and security, economic relations and development co-operation. The use of diplomatic, economic and military means is discussed, together with the role of state actors, intergovernmental organizations and non-state actors.

4.2. Nature of rights

Human Rights And Comparative Foreign Policy Is The First Book In English To Examine The Place Of Human Rights In The Foreign Policies Of A Wide Range Of States During Contemporary Times. The Book Is Also Unique In Utilizing A Common Framework Of Analysis For All 10 Of The Country Or Regional Studies Covered. This Framework Treats Foreign Policy As The Result Of A Two -Level Game In Which Both Domestic And Foreign Factors Have To Be Considered. Leading Experts From Around The World Analyze Both Liberal Democratic And Other Foreign Policies On Human Rights. A General Introduction And A Systematic Conclusion Add To The Coherence Of The Project. The Authors Note The Increasing Attention Given To Human Rights Issues In Contemporary Foreign Policy. At The Same Time, They Argue That Most States, Including Liberal Democratic States That Identify With Human Rights, Are Reluctant Most Of The Time To Elevate Human Rights Concerns To A Level Equal To That Of Traditional Security And Economic Concerns. When States Do Seek To Integrate Human Rights With These And Other Concerns, The Result Is Usually Great Inconsistency In Patterns Of Foreign Policy. The Book Further Argues That Different States Bring Different Emphases To Their Human Rights Diplomacy, Because Of Such Factors As National Political Culture And Perceived National Interests. In The Last Analysis States Can Be Compared Along Two Dimensions Pertaining To Human Rights: Extent To Which They Are Oriented Toward An International Rather Than National Conception Of Rights; And Extent To Which They Are Oriented Toward International Rather Than National Action To Protect Human Rights.

Since the 1950s, the Netherlands has seen a steady growth of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) devoted to the cause of human rights. In the ensuing decades they proliferated and expanded their leverage. At the same time, human rights attained a more secure position on the foreign policy agenda of the Dutch government. Against this background the question arises, to what extent foreign policy-making in the field of human rights is determined by the activities of NGOs. The present study focuses on the efforts of domestic NGOs to have an impact on Dutch human rights policy towards South Africa, Namibia, Indonesia and East Timor from the late 1970s until the early 1990s. It appraises whether NGOs have been able to influence Dutch human rights policy towards these countries. Furthermore, it clarifies which factors contributed to and detracted from the influence of these groups. The characteristics of NGOs are taken into consideration, along with the strategies applied and the interaction between NGOs, as well as factors regarding the political environment. Conclusions about NGO-influence and contributive and detracting factors are reached on the basis of five case studies. These concern the efforts of NGOs (1) to press the government to implement a boycott of South African coal (1979-1990); (2) to promote an active policy against the application of capital punishment in South Africa under apartheid (1978-1993); (3) to end the enrichment of Namibian uranium in the Netherlands (1977-1989); (4) to promote an active policy against the execution of political prisoners in Indonesia (1979- 1995); and finally, (5) to promote an active policy in reaction to the Santa Cruz massacre in East Timor (1991-1995).

This collection of essays, contributed by his friends, pays tribute to the work of Peter R. Baehr, whose impressive career spans some 40 years of activity devoted to the cause of human rights. Although human rights remains the leitmotiv of Professor Baehr's career, the themes explored in this collection - the role of the nation-state in the 21st century, international organisations and foreign policy - are a reflection of the versatility of his work and the range of his interests. This volume thus offers the reader a stimulating collection of essays by a wide range of international experts on both the theory and the practice of human rights within the context of the nation-state of the 21st century.

In a troubled world where millions die at the hands of their own governments and societies, some states risk their citizens' lives, considerable portions of their national budgets, and repercussions from opposing states to protect helpless foreigners. Dozens of Canadian peacekeepers have died in Afghanistan defending humanitarian reconstruction in a shattered faraway land with no ties to their own. Each year, Sweden contributes over $3 billion to aid the world's poorest citizens and struggling democracies, asking nothing in return. And, a generation ago, Costa Rica defied U.S. power to broker a peace accord that ended civil wars in three neighboring countries--and has now joined with principled peers like South Africa to support the United Nations' International Criminal Court, despite U.S. pressure and aid cuts. Hundreds of thousands of refugees are alive today because they have been sheltered by one of these nations. Global Good Samaritans looks at the reasons why and how some states promote human rights internationally, arguing that humanitarian internationalism is more than episodic altruism--it is a pattern of persistent principled politics. Human rights as a principled foreign policy defies the realist prediction of untrammeled pursuit of national interest, and suggests the utility of constructivist approaches that investigate the role of ideas, identities, and influences on state action. Brysk shows how a diverse set of democratic middle powers, inspired by visionary leaders and strong civil societies, came to see the linkage between their long-term interest and the common good. She concludes that state promotion of global human rights may be an option for many more members of the international community and that the international human rights regime can be strengthened at the interstate level, alongside social movement campaigns and the struggle for the democratization of global governance.