1 / 10

Global Good Samaritans: Human rights foreign policy

Global Good Samaritans: Human rights foreign policy. August 2010 Australia. Why--Norms and globalization. Moral interdependence Strat. interdependence: “human security” Intl. community: intl. hr “regime” Identity: roles, scripts Governance: civil society, legitimacy

vernon
Download Presentation

Global Good Samaritans: Human rights foreign policy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Global Good Samaritans: Human rights foreign policy August 2010 Australia

  2. Why--Norms and globalization • Moral interdependence • Strat. interdependence: “human security” • Intl. community: intl. hr “regime” • Identity: roles, scripts • Governance: civil society, legitimacy • Socialization: politics of persuasion

  3. The intl. hr regime:sometimes--“it takes a state” • Multilateral: ICC • Bilateral: S Afr sanctions • peace promotion: CR C Amer • Aid: Sweden c. $3 billion/year • Refugees: Sweden>10,000 Iraqis

  4. Research design • Global map for necessary and sufficient conditions • Thresholds: • democracy, • development, • Secure globalization • Variables: • Leadership, • civil society, • ideology • Case selection • Leaders: • high inputs, high outcomes = Sweden • Laggards: • high inputs, low outcomes = Japan • Least likely cases: • low inputs, high outcomes = Costa Rica • Changes: NL, South Africa

  5. Sources of Reconstruction • States “most likely to succeed” (dozens) • Small is beautiful; middle and regional powers • Secure: demilitarized, neutral, or sheltered • Global: Outward-oriented, linkages • Democracy—deep, Parliamentary, equity (esp. gender) • Regional placement: CR vs. Canada vs. Australia • Problems in any dimension pull down level of promotion

  6. Activating the potential • Agents • Charismatic leaders • Foreign policy professionals • Civil society: • Cosmopolitan • Connected to for. policy • Ideas • Universalism • Social democracy • Interdependence • Regional niche • Again, lacks lead to limits

  7. Canada as Global Good Samaritan—Inputs and outcomes

  8. Implications • National interest can be reconstructed • Some states build global governance • But need: • Eternal vigilance • Activate more laggards • Build “coalitions of the caring” • Deepen global norms • Evaluate effectiveness

  9. “Best practices”: doing well at doing good • Good-enough Samaritans: leverage inconsistency • Democracy begins at home: civil soc, equity • Coordinate policy: dev-security-hr • Fund from the bottom up • “It takes a Ministry”?: • Where is hr placed? Level, mainstreaming, IO vs. policy • Foreign Ministry practices: rotations, country desks, • aid agency status: ind? Budget process • Refugees as poli vs. legal subjects, placement • Evaluate and learn • Venue-shop beyond borders • Institutionalize hr promotion; beyond charisma • Join “coalitions of the caring”

  10. Australia: “Waltzing Matilda”? (Lawler) • Outputs: • Multilateral and aid aspirations launched by Evans, but consistent under conservatives (like Sweden) • Bilateral tricky vis trade, transnatl (like Canada) • Timor intervention; demo, stability, or hr? • Refugee contradiction (like NL) • Inputs: • Dev demo secure middle power w growing multicult pop (like Canada) • Commonwealth values; 2005 82% think Aus “good international citizen” • But regional barrier to universalism (like S Afr) • Neo-liberal post-9/11 U.S. “humanitarianism lite”

More Related