Europe has got a long tradition of human rights. Actually, the idea of "the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family" as laid down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations is said to have its historic origins in ancient Greek philosophy and Roman law. The first official declarations of human rights, starting with the English Bill of Rights of 1688, all stand in this tradition. Hence, it is not far-fetched when Europeans see themselves as defenders of human rights principles on the international scene.
Especially the European Union′s self-perception has moved in this direction. With the end of the Cold War, the right time seems to have come for politics that increasingly take into account, defend and even fight for such values: the war of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation with Yugoslavia is only one example of this tendency. But it is a good example, because the "humanitarian catastrophe" that was triggered by Western air-strikes also highlights the fact that the "new Europe" is far from being an examplary place where human rights are widely respected.
The essay examines in a critical way the extent to which politics in the pre-9/11 "new Europe" were actually characterised by human rights principles. The foundations of these principles in the "old Europe" will be considered, as well as the double challenge to politics brought about by the fall of the Berlin wall and how this challenge has been met in the 1990s by political institutions (EU's internal and external human rights policies, NATO). The essay concludes with a discussion of the universality claim of human rights in an Western-dominated and internationalised world.
The essay critically reviews facts and fiction of European human rights policies on the pre-9/11 international scene.
Table of Contents
1. The rise of human rights in European politics after World War II
2. The double challenge of the "new Europe" and political responses
3. The EU's commitment to human rights in its foreign policy
4. NATO and the defence of human rights
5. Human rights principles and EU internal policies
6. Preserving the universality of human rights
Research Objectives and Themes
This essay evaluates the extent to which human rights principles characterize contemporary European politics, analyzing the roles of major institutions like the EU, NATO, and the OSCE. It examines the institutional evolution since the end of the Cold War and explores the tension between stated human rights commitments and the practical challenges of migration, security, and humanitarian intervention.
- The historical development of human rights norms in European security structures.
- The institutional responses to post-Cold War political and humanitarian challenges.
- The internal versus external application of human rights principles within the European Union.
- The transformation of NATO from a defense alliance to an actor in humanitarian "out of area" operations.
- The credibility gap concerning the universal application of human rights values.
Excerpt from the Book
1. The rise of human rights in European politics after World War II
After the end of the Second World War, human rights issues became more central on the international political agenda. In 1945-6, the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg tried German high officials for "crimes against peace", "war crimes", and "crimes against humanity", which was unprecedented in the history of law. At the same time, the international community increasingly perceived the need to lay down certain principles that should be a guide-line for both states and individuals how to respect human dignity in law and practice, and on 10 December 1948 the UDHR was adopted by the United Nations (UN). Despite its non-binding character, the document had a deep impact on politics all over the world by drawing the attention to the idea of human rights as such.
In Europe, the UDHR fell on especially fertile ground. Earlier the same year, the so-called "Congress of Europe" with delegates from sixteen countries in its "Message to Europeans" had already called for "a Charter of Human Rights guaranteeing liberty of thought, assembly and expression as well as the right to form political opposition", and "a Court of Justice with adequate sanctions for the implementation of this Charter" (quoted in Fletcher 1980, p. 141). The latter "desire" of the delegates in The Hague clearly went beyond the scope of the UDHR. But as the Universal Declaration provided an internationally accepted basis, the idea of enforcement mechanisms could be put into effect, and already in 1949, the Council of Europe was established. Its own document, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), directly relies on the UDHR, but being a legally binding document the keeping to its principles can be sued at the Commission of Ministers or the Strasbourg-based European Court of Human Rights (CHR) as the last instance by both the states that have signed the Convention and their citizens.
Summary of Chapters
1. The rise of human rights in European politics after World War II: This chapter traces the emergence of human rights as a focal point in post-war international law, starting with the Nuremberg Trials and the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
2. The double challenge of the "new Europe" and political responses: The author analyzes how European institutions struggled to adapt to the post-Cold War security environment, characterized by new ethnic conflicts and rising migration pressures.
3. The EU's commitment to human rights in its foreign policy: This section investigates the EU’s external human rights efforts, highlighting its use of trade clauses and joint actions to promote democratic values internationally.
4. NATO and the defence of human rights: The chapter explores NATO's shift toward humanitarian interventions and its role in "out of area" security operations, specifically focusing on the Kosovo precedent.
5. Human rights principles and EU internal policies: Here, the essay examines the internal inconsistencies of the EU regarding human rights, particularly focusing on restrictive asylum and immigration policies.
6. Preserving the universality of human rights: The concluding chapter questions the credibility of Western actors in promoting human rights while maintaining a selective and power-based approach to enforcement.
Keywords
Human rights, European Union, NATO, OSCE, Cold War, Humanitarian intervention, Refugee policy, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Democracy, Foreign policy, Security, International law, Migration, Accountability, Institutions.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research?
The essay explores how significantly human rights principles influence political decision-making and institutional actions in post-Cold War Europe.
Which key institutions are analyzed in this work?
The work primarily analyzes the European Union (EU), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
What is the central research question?
The research asks to what extent politics in the "new Europe" are truly characterized by human rights principles versus geopolitical interests and institutional power dynamics.
What methodology does the author apply?
The author utilizes a qualitative institutional analysis, reviewing the historical evolution of norms, international agreements, and political actions to assess human rights implementation.
What does the main part of the work address?
The main body investigates the tension between the institutional promotion of human rights and the practical failures or selective enforcement observed in external foreign policy and internal immigration practices.
Which keywords characterize the work?
Key concepts include Human Rights, European Integration, Humanitarian Intervention, Security Policy, and the institutional "pillarization" of the European Union.
How does the author characterize the impact of NATO’s Kosovo intervention?
The author views the intervention in Kosovo as a precedent that effectively ended the "Westphalian era" by prioritizing humanitarian goals over traditional state sovereignty, while noting the resulting credibility issues for NATO.
What is the primary criticism regarding EU internal policy?
The author criticizes the EU for pursuing restrictive immigration and asylum policies that often contradict the very human rights principles the Union claims to champion externally.
- Quote paper
- Christopher Selbach (Author), 2001, Human rights in European politics, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/16469
