Human Rights in the EU and the US - Term Paper Example

Human Rights The concept of human rights came out from the love and pursuit of wisdom of intellectual means and moral self-discipline of natural rights which are thought to remain alive even when treated harshly by governments or public. Human rights considers the basic rights and independence for which each human being is entitled and comprise the right to life and liberty, freedom of thought and manifestation, and equality before the law of a nation. Few think, practically there is no difference between the two and consider both are same thing, but others keep the terms separate to avoid link with some features relating to natural rights. Considering the natural rights, in particular, are rights of a person, and thought to be beyond the authority of a governing body or international organization. This theory was developed by the famous philosopher John Locke (Wikipedia n.pag). Human rights, democratic system and the statute of law are center ethics of the European Union and entrenched in its beginning pact. They have been toughened by the adoption of a Charter of Fundamental Rights. Value for human rights is a precondition for countries looking to join the Union and a requirement for countries that have business pact and other agreements with it. The European Union considers human rights as universal and inseparable. Hence they promote it aggressively and protecting them within its boundaries and in its relationships with outside nations. The European Union’s human rights policy is made applicable to civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. It also looks ahead to encourage the rights of women and children in addition to minorities and displaced persons. The terrorist activity is one of a main concern and the fight against it is given most priority. Even though European Union has superior human rights evidence, yet it is not satisfied. It is mainly anxious about human rights in the area of refuge and migration and it is against racial discrimination, and other types of unfairness to minorities. The European Union has a long practice of welcoming people from other countries. The European Union has already given the rights of the five million non-EU refugee personnel lawfully recognized in the European Union, even with the right of family members to join them. Several steps have been taken up for setting up a Common European Asylum System with approved measures for granting and withdrawing refugee status and setting reception environment for asylum seekers. Further, a European Refugee Fund has been built up to offer support for the reception, incorporation and voluntary return to the country of birth of refugees. In the event of a mass arrival of displaced persons as happened during the Balkan clashes in the 1990s the EU has as well taken measures to make available temporary shelter. For example these provisions took effect after the 1999 war in Kosovo, shelter displaced persons for up to three years, providing them with house and work permits, accommodation, access to social and medical services, and schooling for their children. The European Union has steadily pressed the human rights subject to the forefront of its dealings with other nations and states. All accords on trade or collaboration with other countries enclose a section specifying that human rights are an indispensable part in the dealings between the parties. At present there are more than 120 such agreements. To give significance and promote human rights around the globe, the European Union funds the European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights. Ever since 1994 its funds has steadily increased and will go beyond €1.1 billion for the period from 2007 to 2013. The program gives importance for human rights and the growth of democracy into a long-term background and concentrates mainly on the rise democracy, high-quality governance and the rule of law, putting an end to the death penalty in countries where it is still retain, combating torture through protective measures and repressive measures, combating racial discrimination by making sure respect for political and civil rights. The initiative also finances plan for gender equality and the safeguard of children. Besides, it give supports to joint venture among the European Union and other organizations concerned in the protection of human rights – such as the United Nations, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the Council of Europe and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (Europa n.pag). In the United States fundamental human rights was a foundation stone over last two centuries and since then, the essential objective of U.S. foreign policy has been the endorsement of respect for human rights, as embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The United States appreciates that the survival of human rights facilitates to safeguard the peace, discourage violence, encourage the rule of law, combat crime and corruption, reinforce democracies, and stop humanitarian disasters. Since the encouragement of human rights is significant the United States looks forward to: Hold governments answerable to their responsibility under universal human rights norms and international human rights instruments. Endorse superior admiration for human rights, together with freedom from torture, freedom of expression, press freedom, womens rights, childrens rights, and the protection of minorities. Support the rule of law, look for responsibility, and change cultures of impunity. Help efforts to improvement and reinforce the institutional capability of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UN Commission on Human Rights. And organize human rights activities with important partners, together with the EU, and regional organizations. The Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL) applies three important values to its work on human rights: DRL make every effort to learn the truth and state the facts in all of its human rights inquiries, reports on country conditions, speeches and votes in the UN, and asylum reports. Yearly, DRL builds up, edits, and presents to Congress a 5,000-page report on human rights conditions in over 190 countries that is appreciated worldwide for its objectivity and correctness. DRL takes reliable positions regarding past, present, and future violence. To stop ongoing violence, the bureau uses an "inside-outside" approach that combines strong, outside focus on human rights apprehensions (including the possibility of sanctions) with equally strong support for domestic improvement. Every year DRL ensures that human rights deliberation are included into U.S. military training and security assistance curriculum; supports the rights of women through international movements for political contribution; organizes high-level human rights discussion with other governments; manages U.S. policy on human rights with key partners. DRL forms and maintains joint ventures with organizations, governments, and multilateral institutions dedicated to human rights. The government department takes advantage of multilateral forums to focus international attention on human rights problems and look for rectification. DRL gives important technical, financial, or staff support for U.S. delegations to the annual meetings of several international human rights organizations; organizes usual discussions with Native American tribes; maintains relations with the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights; and supports the creation of effective joint human rights mechanisms and institutions for accountability (USA.gov). According to Daniel Fried, Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs there is no closer partnership in the world than that between the United States and Europe. These two countries do not represent a single form of government although they do promote a single society of values, interests, and responsibilities. Their roles in the world are not the same, but they are inextricably close, by choice and nature. The uniqueness are bound up by their dedications to human rights, rule of law, freedoms of religion and the press, and to market finances. The United States and Europe are the main centers of power and prosperity and, hence, have great responsibility to help the people around the globe and help to shape a better world. It is important to understand a flourishing world, ever more differentiated by the rule of law and intensifying democracy, is better for all, and far better than a closed world of hostile philosophies and spheres of influence. There is little that one can do alone but more can be done if both countries cooperate and collaborate together and the success is definite. This is the case from Kosovo to Afghanistan. Poll after poll it reveals an accepted consent for Europe and America to work together on the major matters confronting the world. There is a lot the United States and Europe can do in the world and all these activities, neither the United States nor Europe can take up alone. America in the world needs Europe and Europe needs America. The task is to put it to work in the world to resolve the evils only when both join together. Peace and security; the advance of wealth; the common challenge of climate change and energy security; the fight against disease and poverty, and misery can be achieved when both countries work together with these common goal (Fried n.pag). The U.S. involvement in Iraq and its consequences were gravely affecting U.S. trustworthiness abroad, as well as in Europe. The Abu Ghraib jail humiliation astonished and distressed the European partners. Many Europeans observed the actions of U.S. soldiers at Abu Ghraib as following directly from U.S. strategies in the war on terrorism, such as confining suspected Al Qaeda terrorists at Guantánamo Bay. Few pointed out that these actions dishonored human rights. Opinion polls in Europe point towards waning faith in U.S. leadership. One of the opinion poll established that an average of 58% of Europeans in nine countries think that strong U.S. leadership in world relationships is detrimental. And columnist stress that this loss of faith and reliability has made many European partners less inclined to bear a bigger financial or security responsibility in Iraq. Some accuse that the Bush Administration’s hunt of its goals in Iraq spoiled not only the trustworthiness of the United Nations, but also of NATO. Lots of Europeans also concerned that the Bush Administration was keen to keep Europe weak and divided and shift in U.S. policy keep away from continued support for further European incorporation. In its second term of Bush Administration’s, efforts towards improvement of U.S.-European relations responded positively due to the European trips in February 2005 by President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Many scholars consider U.S. - EU are going ahead toward improving the relationship, even when transatlantic tensions have not disappeared, and resolving diversities need a continued political dedication from both sides. Some observers point out to the recent U.S.-EU cooperation to restrain Iran’s nuclear ambitions as a concrete positive progress that reveals the value of the transatlantic partnership. On the other hand, others point out that many Europeans still remain doubtful about the degree to which the Bush Administration stance on its European allies and friends as full partners (Archick 1-20). According to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, the shared effort to keep the people protected in the face of the ongoing menace of global terrorism is important. Because democratic cultures fastened on civil liberties and the rule of law, America and Europe face huge challenges in countering efficiently to the terrorist threat. But frankly speaking the United States and some of its democratic partners have differed on how to counter certain features of the struggle against terrorism. By underscoring that both countries are committed to working together with all Allies and partners, in full respect of the respective national sovereignties, and wish to stay occupied in an open and positive dialogue on these demanding topics. Even though these subjects are multifaceted both countries must not let the agreement between the United States and Europe in fighting terrorism is destabilized over differences. Through a strong sustained joint venture between the United States and Europe will we be able to upset militant plans, wipe out their capability to commit terrorist operations, and provide millions in a disturbed region a confident option to the terrorists’ ideology of hate, fear, and oppression. Freedom is the enduring hope of all humankind. A close and united partnership of all countries and especially Europe and the United States remains vital to the security and prosperity of the whole world. It is vital to take a moment at the beginning to mirror on what have accomplished working together since last few years in the criminal justice arena. Both countries together are tackling the truth of terrorism with a persistent determination and are achieving remarkable result in many areas. In the previous years, both countries have reached out to one another and protected unparalleled new levels of collaboration between the respective criminal justice systems. Give thanks to coordinated efforts by antiterrorism units on both sides of the Atlantic, which were capable together to upset and act against plots to entrust attacks in both the United States and the U.K. As a matter of fact there are lot to do together to succeed in the struggle against terrorism and establishment of human rights. Both countries can learn a great deal from one another by comparing how the different legal systems and cultures approach similar terror-related issues. Along with that both countries must understand that the societies, though both firmly committed to the rule of law, will never be the same. Under European legal systems, they have tools at their disposal for fighting violence that are not available in U.S. criminal justice system. One basis of determining the discussion about privacy law in the United States is that the European Data Protection Directive is a more superior model than he United States. The US is considered to have insufficient protection for personal data such as transactional information that companies might keep on customer dealings. This finding caused a lengthy negotiation between Europes guardians of data and the U.S. Department of Commerce, to decide whether and when U.S. companies could store information about their clients, employees, and customers in Europe. It is going to be a great loss to both the US and Europe if they were not able to do the same thing in the terrorism background. None can afford to erect obstacles that prevent sharing critical information about terror suspects. It is very important to stay united and resolute in the common struggle to maintain peace, fight terrorism and keep up human rights. And for that to take place, it is significant to continue to talk and listen, to improve mutual understanding and work through the challenges, and to reaffirm the common friendship (Gonzales n.pag 2006). Work Cited Archick, K. The United States and Europe: Possible Options for U.S. Policy January 23, 2006, CRS Report for Congress, pp1-20. [22 November 2007] Europa Overviews of European Union Activities : Human Rights (June 2007) [22 November 2007] Fried, D. Europes Role in the World May 9, 2007, Remarks at the Europa Forum Program [22 November 2007] Gonzales, A.R. Prepared Remarks by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales at the International Institute for Strategic Studies March 7, 2006, [22 November 2007] USA.gov Human Rights [22 November 2007] Wikipedia Human rights Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., [22 November 2007] Read More