Over the past week we’ve been going over the issue of human rights in class, namely the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Written by the Allied nations in the aftermath of World War II, the main purpose of the UDHR was to enshrine and protect basic human rights. Fun fact: the Soviet Union and China, two countries that don’t do very well in the human rights department, actually sent representatives to co-author the UDHR with the Western powers.
Now that’s nice and all, but what has the UDHR actually accomplished? In theory, it should mean that every person will have their basic human rights listed in the UDHR granted to them, everyone is at peace with their neighbors, and humanity as a whole advances towards the greater good.
In reality…well reality is bleak. While the UN must be commended for taking an unprecedented and much needed act of ratifying the UDHR, the same praise cannot be extended to the UN’s record of acting upon and enforcing the UDHR. Rather, the UDHR now seems like a yardstick to measure the qualities of different nations. Countries that do exceedingly well get to brag about it and view those that score lower with disdain. Countries that do score lower can get away with doing so more often than not.
The main problem isn’t that people don’t care; in fact that couldn’t be further from the truth. Almost everybody you meet on the streets will respect and be passionate about granting people their basic rights. The problem is that the people who are in power and who are supposed to ensure that the UDHR (amongst other international law) is upheld have no effective means of enforcing the law, and chastising those who dare break them. You can put as many laws, treaties, and legislatures in effect, but if your words hold no power and your arms have no reach then you might as well be talking to the wind. The now defunct League of Nations is a reminder of that.
Rwanda, Iran, and more recently Syria are prime examples for this. However one cannot magically solve the issues plaguing the international community today by simply granting the UN more power. The reason is two fold: First, who gets to draw the line and second, power corrupts.
Who gets the draw the line between what’s a violation to the UDHR (and other treaties in general) and what’s not? The US thinks that Syria is a prime example of a humanitarian crisis and wants to “liberate” Syria. Russia and China however think other wise. Political bickering and infighting has stalled the UN long enough for atrocities to occur many times. Rwanda and Bosnia are cases where intervention occurred only after terrible, terrible damage had been done. During the Sino-Japanese war, the Western nations were sympathetic to China’s pleas for intervention, especially after the siege of Shanghai, but were unwilling to take action with clouds of war looming closer to home.
The UN has to be able to quickly reach unanimous decisions and react (by any means if necessary) before rouge nations and unethical regimes pay heed. Yet at the same time it cannot be granted too much power, and must be held accountable for its actions. Lest we end up with a quasi-Star Wars scenario where Chancellor Palpatine “democratically” assumes all power and is henceforth referred to as “Emperor.” The balance between authority and power must be meticulously calculated.
It will be a long and arduous task before the UDHR is acknowledged and enforced worldwide, but it has to be done for a better future.