The Concept of Cultural Relativism and Declaration on Human Rights - Research Paper Example

 "We are at the beginning of an age in which it will be insisted that the same standards of conduct and of responsibility for wrong shall be observed among nations and their governments that are observed among the individual citizens of civilized states". Woodrow Wilson, 1917 Introduction No area of international relations is more fraught with peril, and more fragilely constructed, than those aspects of an agreement where culture justifies an issue of significance that is in opposition to our previously held conviction on human rights. The issue of human rights is not new and dates back several centuries. The more recent 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights is an evolution of thinking towards human rights that dates back to the Magna Carta of 1215. Its language has been tempered with the more recent national and international documents, and to a large extent reflects Westernised thinking on religion and philosophy. As the concept of human rights becomes internationalised, the specific applications of certain rights become regionalized. However, the United Nation's stand on human rights has been accused of being heavily influenced by western standards, as European influence has a significant impact on the organization. What constitutes a human right is to a large degree based on a country's, ethnicity's, or culture's traditions and individual beliefs. Regional human rights organizations are formed and confront the tension of a dual dilemma. They are expected to enact the international standards as put forth by the United Nations, while being expected to respect the regional rights of the culture involved. Cultural relativism has become the guiding light of the regional human rights organizations, and in accepting this agenda they have been ineffective at pursuing any real progress towards a universal set of human rights as put forth by the United Nations more than a half century ago. Historical Background Woodrow Wilson's words spoken in the wake of World War I relate the importance that human rights have had for the civilized world. Since the experience of two World Wars, the international community has sought to come to some agreement on the civility of the actions and reactions of nations, states, and individuals to disagreements on material as well as moral grounds. According to Jelin (2003, p.103), "Within the cultural frame of the contemporary West, the question of responsibility toward the other arose as a central concern of the social sciences after World War II, when engaged intellectuals felt the urgency of deciphering the enigma of the roots of violence and evil as a way of preventing their recurrence and establishing solid bases for solidarity and democracy". Yet, there has always been the debate as to what level of human rights abuse should be tolerated, while still showing a respect for sovereign nations. The current standard, the UN's Universal Declaration on Human Rights, is perceived in most parts of the world as being too heavily influenced by the cultural and religious values of the white European experience. For many other cultures, demanding their compliance is viewed as an unfair intrusion in their right to self-determination, and possibly a violation of their right to choose their own religion. Others label it cultural imperialism that borders on cultural genocide. By imposing the West's version of human rights onto their culture, they must alter their own and in doing so may forfeit it forever. Cultural relativism has become a popular theoretical lens to view the world community in the face of expanding globalism. It is a convenient way to tolerate the transgressions of our neighbours, as long as they do not violate our sovereign borders. It additionally places no burden of value judgement on the acts and norms of societies when we take a single incident out of the societal context. For these reasons, cultural relativism has been a safe way to approach the concept of dignity, duty, and the rights of man. Cultural relativism places no expectations on the observer and asks nothing of the observed. However, taken to its logical extremes, cultural relativism is a weak argument to base truth upon. As Krausz (1989, p.1-2) states, "The extreme relativist might hold that each belief is as good as another because each belief should be judged according to the unique circumstances of its appearance". Some Human rights organizations have used this basis to justify what others declare is an outrageous violation of basic human dignity, or to demonise a long held tradition that has its basis in a regional or international religion. Honour killing a woman for violating a family's honour is justified as a religious belief that has a social value to some, while others see it as an extreme intrusion into the dignity of the female gender. International organizations and civilized nations have been reluctant to act in the name of human rights for fear of violating their traditional right to self-determination. The wealthiest countries of the US and Britain state their public support for the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, but in reality only accept political and civil rights when it is in their self interest (IRIN 2006, p.15). In addition, cultural relativism allows the agencies to escape that decision and save the embarrassment of having to state that there is a superior moral standard and a universal set of human rights is a possibility (Krausz 1989, p.348-352). Meanwhile, local and regional organizations are constructed to accept and morally justify almost any act conceivable. Current Implications International human rights have come to the forefront of the world's priority due to the ramifications they can have on a culture. A society's views towards gender, age, economics, and the environment are all part of the local or regional culture, and are all at the centre of the debate on human rights. While there has been a call for a universal set of human rights, there is wide spread disagreement on what those rights should look and what issues they should address. Adding another dimension to the complexity of human rights is the fact that the culture is deeply rooted in religion and is not easily or practically altered in the minds of the public. One of the initial hurdles to overcome for a regional human rights organization is the mere fact of involvement and participation. Not only will the regional group manifest the culture that it is comprised of or serves, it will also reflect the degree of commitment that the culture has towards human rights. While the UK and US have proclaimed ample support for international human rights through the UN, its citizens may lack a commitment to devote the necessary resources needed to implement any meaningful program. A Gallop poll of US citizens on attitudes towards the genocide in Rwanda found that "just 26% thought American troops should have been used as a part of a UN mission to prevent the Rwandan genocide, whereas 41% chose the “not become involved” option" (McFarland & Mathews 2005, p.310). While the US lack of response in Rwanda has been blamed on racial discrimination towards the African continent, it may more aptly be attributed to an overall lack of concern for international human rights abuses. The poll further found that "just 15% wanted to use the American military “more often” or “much more often” to stop mass killings or ethnic cleansing, whereas 38% wanted to do so “less often” or “much less often.”'" (McFarland & Mathews 2005, p.310). While this poll was of US citizens, its results can be generalised across other industrialised liberal democracies. Clearly a nation that does not want to get involved in international affairs in regards to human rights will almost certainly bring a cultural agenda when they do. The Impact on Specific Rights One of the greatly divergent views on human rights is seen in the contrast between the Europeans and the Afghanistan Taliban in regards to their treatment of women. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights proclaims the prohibition of "cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment" (Franck 2001, p.192). However, there is a dispute about what constitutes cruel or inhuman within the different cultures. The Taliban routinely subordinates women by denying them the basic rights to liberty, free choice, and education. They additionally subject women to stoning, flogging, and honour murder. For these reasons, the UN General Assembly and the Security Council have denounced the Taliban, and have refused to recognize them or accept the credentials of their delegation. However, the Taliban argue that their women have been freed from the exploitation experienced by women in the West by activities such as pornography and prostitution, and have "reintroduced social cohesion, decency, and family values into societies corrupted by colonialism and globalization" (Franck 2001, p.192). The determination of what constitutes a violation is manifested in the local contextualization of a human right. According to Merry (2003, p.8), "Critiques of these region-specific anti-woman practices become part of a more general critique of cultural practices that harm women, while cultural practices that protect women receive far less attention". While the Taliban view the subjugation of women as an honour to the family, the West views it as an impediment to individual freedom. Mediating the differences in culture, as it manifests in human rights, leads to ever-increasing disparities as it begins to more sharply define the differences. This is often most apparent when the issue of religion and gender are taken together, as almost universally the treatment of women has a basis in religion. The importance of religion cannot be overstated. According to Gallagher (2004, p.453), "religiously based gender strategies are not simply a reaction against or strategy for coping with modernity but a product of the distinctive history, subculture, and theology of each tradition". The Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), a 57 state organization, has challenged the validity of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and proclaimed it to be a Westernised document that was not relevant to the Muslim world. The Declaration on Human Rights recognizes the right to change religions, but was also challenged by the Muslim states "which were concerned that this right gave too much scope to missionaries, who had often been involved in the colonisation of developing and Middle Eastern states" (Evans 2002, p.4). China has some legal protection for the freedom of religion, but the government vacillates between the views that "religious freedom as an important part of Chinese society and those who see religion as an essentially negative, counter-revolutionary force that should be eliminated as soon as possible" (Evans 2002, p.8). The Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam was introduced in 1990, which included "laws which would prevent criticism of certain ideas, ideologies, and religious traditions" (Dacey & Koproske 2008, p.4). In addition, it explicitly cites Islamic law and "not only threatens the inter-cultural consensus on which international human rights instruments are based, it introduces intolerable discrimination against non-Muslims and women, imposes restrictions on fundamental rights" and "clearly suggests that it is Islam, not the individual, that deserves protection" (Dacey & Koproske 2008, pp.4,6). This manifestation is in line with the Chinese view that the larger collective is granted more rights than the individual. The concept of human rights as put forth by the OIC is clearly a manifestation of the regional culture and the Islamic religion. No issue has brought about greater international contention regarding human rights than the issue of sexual preference. The matter was not introduced as a part of the UN's official resolutions until it was introduced by Brazil in 2003. At that time it "faced fierce opposition led by the Vatican and the Organization of the Islamic Conference", an unlikely alliance on any issue (Kukura 2005, p.181). The European Court of Human Rights even avoids directly confronting the issue and views it as a component of interdependent rights and simply states, "Human dignity and human freedom imply that a man should be free to shape himself and his fate in the way he deems best fits his personality" (Kukura 2005, p.185). The degree of regional pressures based on religious culture is evident with the accusation that "homosexuality only occurs in the “decadent” West" (Kukura 2005, p.186). This issue has been omitted for such a long period because it is so soundly based on regional culture and religious beliefs, and addressing it will be obviously biased on the part of the agency or organization that monitors it. Regional Impact Two of the extremes on the global perception of human rights are the rights as put forth by the United Nations and the concept as viewed by China. European traditions and Chinese culture have several dissimilarities that greatly divide them. They have different economic systems that are based upon their worldview of individuality or collectivism. China is a socialistic economy, which reflects their view of society as a functioning entity has greater need than the individual in respect for rights. The United States and European Union are more capitalistic economies that place the individual's freedom and liberty as a higher priority than the greater public good. Disagreements on human rights violations have a long history between the US, Europe, and China. "Throughout the 1950s and 1960s China charged the United States and other Western powers with violating the rights to self-determination, independence and sovereignty of the peoples of Korea, Laos, Cambodia, South Vietnam, the Philippines, the Arab world, Latin America, Africa and Cyprus, among other places" (Nathan 1994, p.624). Colonization and the spread of democracy was, and still is, viewed by the Chinese as a basic violation of a nation's right to sovereignty. This basic philosophy is also reflected in their view of human rights, which forms a foundation of renunciation for an international consensus with respect for individual rights. China has consistently rejected the United Nation's declarations and agreements on human rights and have viewed it as cultural imperialism and "Chinese officials have persistently rejected the assumptions of individualism and universalism in human rights discourse" (Adams 1998, p.78). This barrier to agreement has become an obstacle in pursuing human rights on any international level, as China views this as cultural imperialism and an undue intervention on their socialistic political ideology. Human rights are not only a manifestation of the regional culture and local rights organizations, it is often an arena where the rights are acknowledged based on a hierarchal of power. Agreements such as the Geneva Convention and international conventions on war and war crimes are only of value if they are enforceable. The US has consistently agreed to these conventions and has consistently spoken up in defence of human rights. However, the US has not allowed "the International Criminal Court from trying U.S. citizens accused of crimes against humanity" and "has refused to apply the Geneva Convention rules on the rights of combatants to those accused of being terrorists" (Castles 2005, p.690). Taken to more extreme limits, the world's culture, as dictated by globalisation and the hegemonic power of the US, will be the Westernised version found in the UN's Universal Declaration on Human Rights that has been criticized by many parts of the world. This will undoubtedly lead to greater tensions and viewed as a cultural occupation or social and cultural genocide. Adding to the tension regarding the divergent views of human rights based on regional culture is the expanding influence of local and regional non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and community-based organizations (CBOs). During the 60th session of the Human Rights Commission, the representative from Pakistan warned that while the NGOs played an important role in reporting and observing human rights abuses, "those bodies should ensure that only their genuine representatives participated in discussions" and went on to warn that the "Commission should be careful to avoid the infiltration of questionable groups under the guise of NGOs" (Breen 2005, p.124). Any group proclaiming to be a spokesperson for human rights can be advocating a highly biased political or cultural agenda. According to Breen (2005, p.126), "NGOs, like some States Parties, are not above manipulating those procedures designed to facilitate their participation in human rights debates for their own political ends". NGOs and CBOs are recognized by a system of accreditations, but offer no assurance of cultural impartiality. Islamic fundamentalist groups, right wing Christian organizations, or political activists could all be the consultants for what constitutes human rights. These organizations are almost exclusively regional and have a foundation in a common language and religion. In addition, it is almost impractical to get an honest assessment as to where their cultural leanings may be. They are represented by leaders who, as Fuchs notes, are "constructs that the official network uses when it wants to attribute merit or blame, rather than explaining the complexities of what the entire organization actually did" (cited in Collins 2003, p.73). They may not only be biasing the concept of what constitutes a human right, but also impacting the objectivity of these regionally manifested organizations. In the absence of any organization, agency, or controlling group in an area that has been devastated by upheaval, such as in the aftermath of war, the UN places together a force to enter the area to secure order. In doing so, it also injects the cultural norms of order and punishment that is reflected by the composition of the force. This was true in Kosovo, when in 1999 the UN assembled a civilian police force to restore law and order after the Serbs pulled out (Decker 2006, p.502). As with any action involving human rights, the police are always an organization that bears a large responsibility to comply, as well as have the greatest opportunity to violate human rights. In fact, the UN Civilian Police (CIVPOL) in Kosovo had the monitoring of human rights as an integral part of its duties in Kosovo. However, there were no clear standards for how the law should be implemented. While the area of greatest human rights violation was in the length of detention, Decker (2005, p.505) notes that "Under international human rights law there is no clearly defined standard in relation to the length of time a person can be held before being brought before an independent judge". The concepts that relate to the basic human right of arrest and detention were imported in a haphazard fashion from the participant's previous experience. This also extends to an officer's use of force when apprehending a suspect. While American officers can fire multiple rounds at a suspect without being charged with excessive force, Swedish officers are limited to one round, which leads to the possibility that "when carrying out executive policing functions, they will use excessive force contrary to local law" (Decker 2005, p.509). Cultural norms and values are not easily trained out of an observer, monitor, or enforcer when placed in a situation where human rights have been violated, or where there is a great degree of lawlessness. Still, these are the very situations that are routinely addressed by regional groups, or international groups with a regional agenda, where they are placed in an effort to police and inspect the local population. With the UN placed as the governing force for the monitoring and enforcement of law and order also comes the call to instil and construct a Westernised democracy. Liberal democracy has been advocated as the only assurance there is against future abuses and human rights violations. This is true in Afghanistan as well as in process in Iraq. Yet, the native people and tribal traditions may not have the same style of rule and order that is offered by the UN peacekeeping forces or the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. Both of these activities bring certain expectations as "the creation of democratic institutional contexts can, then, come to be both a result of and a stimulus for the strengthening of a culture of democratic citizenship" (Jelin 2003, p.108). This forceful action of instilling democracy dictates culture, law, and civic responsibility modelled in the mould of the agency charged with the monitoring and enforcing order. This will inevitably result in greater tension and local organizations making claims of human rights abuses based on their local standards of religion, law, or gender. In any case, there will be a local and regional impact that cannot be eradicated, which will only lead to further claims of violations. Globalisation has given international and regional organizations a duty to uphold human rights in regards to their activities. However, these are often a manifestation of their own inter-cultural experiences. It has put the World Bank in a position to significantly impact human rights based on the capitalistic ideology of its largest contributors and supporters. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights acknowledges the "right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family" (cited in Kent 2005, p.33). Yet, the World Bank dictates international loans and the distribution of wealth on an ideological basis, with little consideration for the resulting violation of this basic human right. It is self-policed and as such merely reflects its own inter-culture. This is also true of the US Congress Human Rights Caucus. They wield influence over the NGOs that monitor human rights, yet act out of ideology, rather than a sense of commitment to a set of universal human rights. According to McCormick and Mitchell (2007, p.583), "we expect that party affiliation would predict Caucus membership, and that Democrats, to the extent that they tend to be more liberal, would likely join the Caucus more often than Republicans". If membership in organizations that task themselves with the issue of human rights is predictable based on ideology, then it must necessarily be biased. Yet, they are not accountable to any authority outside themselves. Kent (2005, p.33), argues that "intergovernmental agencies should be called upon to report regularly on their human rights performance to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights". Agencies, which have international influence, have the ability to enforce their cultural norms on a de facto basis, with no vehicle for the international community to object or appeal. Critique Critics will point out that over time the universal concept of human rights can overcome the possibility of extreme cultural relativism and have a positive effect on human rights. While the Chinese have been highly vocal about their stance on human rights, Japan has been unusually silent. Once again, we see a country that does not want a universal concept of human rights enforced within their borders. When the UN proposed the creation of a High Commissioner for Human Rights in the 1980s, the Japanese strongly opposed the idea and asserted that "holding such an office would likely be highly politicised and only add another layer of bureaucracy to an already ineffective system (Peek 1992, p.221). At that time, Japan expressed its uniqueness and the inability of the international organizations to accommodate its differences. This is in line with the Japanese cultural tradition of being slow to reveal the true reality of a situation. However, Japan has integrated into the international community and is a well-respected modern nation. There has also been progress made by NGOs and regional human rights groups in the area of children's rights. This has especially impacted Latin America where children's rights have been incorporated into the legal framework (Pais & Bissell 2006, p.689). However, these advances came as the result of religious philosophies that were aligned with the UN's view on human rights. When a substantial conflict occurs, it is insurmountable and the regional groups are impotent to make progress or recommend change. Conclusion In conclusion, the concept of cultural relativism has given human rights organizations an easy path for compliance that makes no progress on the road to universal human rights. It has manifested in regional and local agencies that either justify human rights violations or demonise a culture. Taken to the extreme of cultural relativism, there is an attitude that no act can be viewed outside the total contextual situation of the society and the culture. The most egregious and violent acts committed against women in Muslim states are simply viewed as a way to honour women and the family. Socialistic countries place the good of the society above the concern for the minority viewpoint or the individual's liberty. Religion is often at the heart of human rights, which renders extreme violations unapproachable when removed from the religious context, and local human rights groups have used this to justify the denial of the freedom to choose one's own religion. In almost all cases, the agencies or organizations will serve the culture of the group, and neglect the rights as proclaimed by the United Nation's Universal Declaration on Human Rights. Everyone is responsible for human rights. Individuals, international organizations, and nations all have a stake in the dignity and the rights of man. If we are to accept the concept of a universal set of human rights, the regional groups that use cultural relativism to replace action must not be the front lines in the war against human rights violations. References Adams, V 1998, 'Suffering the winds of Lhasa: politicized bodies, human rights, cultural difference, and humanism in Tibet', Medical Anthropology Quarterly, vol.12, no.1, pp.74-102. Breen, C 2005, ' Rationalising the work of UN human rights bodies or reducing the input of NGOs? The changing role of human rights NGOs at the United Nations', Non-State Actors and International Law, vol.5, no.2, pp.101-126. Castles, S 2005, 'Hierarchical citizenship in a world of unequal nation-states', PS: Political Science and Politics, vol.38, no.4, pp.689-692. Collins, R 2003, 'A network theory of culture', Sociological Theory, vol.21, no.1, pp.69-73. Dacey, A & Koproske, C 2008, Islam and human rights, Center for Inquiry International, New York. Decker, DC 2005, 'Enforcing human rights: the role of the UN civilian police in Kosovo, International Peacekeeping, vol.13, no.4, pp.502-516. Evans, C 2002, 'Chinese law and the international protection of religious freedom', Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 36, Melbourne, Australia. Franck, T M 2001, 'Are human rights universal?', Foreign Affairs, vol.80, no.1, pp.191-204. Gallagher, SK 2004, ' Where are the antifeminist evangelicals? Evangelical identity, subcultural location, and attitudes toward feminism', Gender and Society, vol.18, no.4, pp.451-472. Integrated Regional Information Networks (IRIN), 2006, Justice for a lawless world? Rights and reconciliation in a new era of international law, IRIN, New York. Jelin, E 2003, 'Citizenship and alterity: tensions and dilemmas, Latin American Perspectives, vol.30, no.2, pp.101-117. Kent, G 2005, 'The human rights obligations of intergovernmental organizations', UN Chronicle, no.3, pp.32-33. Krausz, M 1989, Relativism: interpretation and confrontation, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame. Kukura, E 2005, 'Sexual orientation and non-discrimination', Peace Review: A Journal of Social Justice, vol.17, no.2-3, pp.181-188. McCormick, JM & Mitchell, NJ 2007, 'Commitments, transnational interests, and Congress: who joins the Congressional Human Rights Caucus?', Political Research Quarterly, vol.60, no.4, pp.579-592. McFarland, S & Mathews, M 2005, 'Do Americans care about human rights', Journal of human rights, vol.4, no.3, pp.305-319. Merry, SE 2003, 'Human rights law and the demonization of culture', Polar: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, vol.26, no.1, pp.1-35. Nathan, AJ 1994, 'Human rights in Chinese foreign policy, The China Quarterly, no.139, pp.622-643. Pais, MS & Bissell, S 2006, 'Overview and implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child', The Lancet, vol.367, pp.689-690. Peek, JM 1992, 'Japan, the United Nations, and human rights', Asian Survey, vol.32, no.3, pp.217-229. Read More