The human rights defined in international treaties: are "culturally relative," that is, merely reflect the cultural views of those states powerful enough to force them into international law, 4% are "universal," that is, reflect rules for the treatment of people that should apply regardless of culture or nationality, 33% involve a mix of truly "universal" human rights and some "culturally relative" human rights.62% Human rights treaties should require states to protect: political rights, such as the rights of free speech, assembly, and voting,10% economic rights, such as the right to food, shelter, and clothing,7% both of the above.82% International treaties should ban abuses of human rights committed by: government policy,25% government policy and cultural tradition,6% government policy, cultural tradition, and individual actions.67% International law should require governments to provide women with equal rights: in all countries, regardless of their religious or cultural traditions,82% only in non-Muslim countries,3% should not require this in any countries.13% International law should require gov’ts to provide women with equal pay for equal work: in all countries, regardless of their religious or cultural traditions,80% only in non-Muslim countries,0% undefined20%

All governments should be required to provide all their citizens with at least minimal levels of food, shelter and housing: regardless of how much it costs,30% only if it can be provided within existing government budgets,23% developed countries should be required to do so out of their own revenues but developing countries should be financed by developed states to do so, 30% governments should not be required to provide these rights.16% It seems morally appropriate to me that American views of human rights are the basis for most human rights defined in international treaties: Yes.38% No.61% The human rights defined in international treaties should include: only those accepted by all nations in the world,11% those accepted by the majority of the nations in the world on a one-country one-vote basis,56% those accepted by the majority of the nations in the world on a one-person one-vote basis (with countries with large populations having more votes), 27% those accepted by the most powerful nations in the world.4% If a government commits an extreme violation of its citizens human rights, the United States should respond by: doing nothing,2% using diplomacy only,21% using diplomacy and economic sanctions,45% using diplomacy, economic sanctions, and military force.31% If the people of a country have a cultural tradition that violates some citizens' human rights, the United States should respond by: doing nothing,8% using diplomacy only,53% using diplomacy and economic sanctions,30% using diplomacy, economic sanctions, and military force.7%

 Criteria for “violation” of human rights ◦ "Who" commits it? Government, culture, "the economy"? ◦ Views of those whose rights are being violated? If oppressed say they accept their lot in an oppressive system, should we accept that as evidence that they are not oppressed? ◦ Other criteria you think are important?  Take action or not? If so, which action? ◦ Type of action? ◦ Magnitude of action? ◦ Cost of action to us? ◦ Other criteria you think are important?

 Numerous conventions on wide range of human rights  Civil, political rights: negative rights; “governments shall not…“ ◦ Life and liberty, no slavery ◦ No arbitrary arrest, presumed innocent, cruel and unusual punishment, ◦ Right to assembly, freedom of expression, and participation in government with equal suffrage ◦ Freedom of movement within states and freedom to leave own state  Economic, social rights: distributive justice; positive rights; governments must …." ◦ Marry and form family ◦ Education, work, and leisure ◦ Social security ◦ Adequate standard of living

 Fundamental contradiction of realist expectations (to extent they have influence)  What they do ◦ Press for creation of NEW international institutions and strengthen EXISTING regimes ◦ Monitor performance ◦ Mobilize public opinion and sympathetic governments to oppose violations ◦ Improve victims' capacity to defend themselves

 How they do it ◦ Broaden scope of conflict ◦ Shift terms of debate ◦ Make principled but pragmatic demands

 Capacities that NGOs have but states lack ◦ Focus on single issue: keep "clean" / "pure" ◦ Collect information within other countries borders in ways considered legitimate ◦ More willing than states to criticize other governments ◦ Work transnationally to develop support

 Tension between sovereignty norm and human rights norms  Universal human rights but conditioned by societies  How should we define human rights?  Once define them, how should we respond when they are violated?