A Reputation of Non-Ratification

Emily Russell
{"title":"A Reputation of Non-Ratification","authors":"Emily Russell","doi":"10.37513/ciar.v12i1.508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The history of the United States’ involvement in international reveals a disproportionate timeline between signing and ratification. Notably, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), one of the binding twin covenants enacting the goals of the non-binding Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), features a 15-year delay following signing before ratification by the U.S. The agreement was viewed as inherently Western, and the United States took leadership during negotiations, becoming the primary promoter of the drafting process. Yet, domestic support for the agreement was seemingly inconsistent with its leading role, identifiable by the delay. The following analysis will evaluate the rationales—legal, institutional, and political—for the delay in the United States’ ratification of the ICCPR. It will then explore catalysts in the international sphere that incited the eventual ratification. Through close readings of Senate hearings, drafts of UN negotiation documents, and analysis of theoretical frameworks by which the United States’ system ratifies international agreements, the following synthesis is a variety of primary and secondary sources which explain the delay in ratification. The study reveals that the United States’ reputation of non-ratification has implications for its international credibility, affecting its ability to shape global politics. The ICCPR is used as a case that elucidates the United States’ rationale for ratifying, or neglecting to ratify, other international agreements; thus, this analysis will address the influence of international politics on domestic participation.","PeriodicalId":222072,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Internation Affairs Review","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cornell Internation Affairs Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37513/ciar.v12i1.508","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The history of the United States’ involvement in international reveals a disproportionate timeline between signing and ratification. Notably, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), one of the binding twin covenants enacting the goals of the non-binding Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), features a 15-year delay following signing before ratification by the U.S. The agreement was viewed as inherently Western, and the United States took leadership during negotiations, becoming the primary promoter of the drafting process. Yet, domestic support for the agreement was seemingly inconsistent with its leading role, identifiable by the delay. The following analysis will evaluate the rationales—legal, institutional, and political—for the delay in the United States’ ratification of the ICCPR. It will then explore catalysts in the international sphere that incited the eventual ratification. Through close readings of Senate hearings, drafts of UN negotiation documents, and analysis of theoretical frameworks by which the United States’ system ratifies international agreements, the following synthesis is a variety of primary and secondary sources which explain the delay in ratification. The study reveals that the United States’ reputation of non-ratification has implications for its international credibility, affecting its ability to shape global politics. The ICCPR is used as a case that elucidates the United States’ rationale for ratifying, or neglecting to ratify, other international agreements; thus, this analysis will address the influence of international politics on domestic participation.
不批准的名声
美国参与国际事务的历史表明,从签署到批准的时间跨度不成比例。值得注意的是,《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》(ICCPR)是制定不具约束力的《世界人权宣言》(UDHR)目标的具有约束力的双公约之一,其特点是在签署后15年才得到美国的批准。该协议被视为本质上是西方的,美国在谈判中发挥领导作用,成为起草过程的主要推动者。然而,国内对该协议的支持似乎与它的主导作用不一致,这一点可以从拖延中看出。下面的分析将评估美国推迟批准《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》的法律、制度和政治理由。然后,它将探讨在国际领域促成最终批准的催化剂。通过对参议院听证会、联合国谈判文件草案的仔细阅读,以及对美国体系批准国际协定的理论框架的分析,以下综合了解释批准延迟的各种第一手和第二手来源。研究显示,美国不批准条约的名声影响了它的国际信誉,影响了它塑造全球政治的能力。《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》被用作一个案例,阐明了美国批准或忽视批准其他国际协定的理由;因此,本分析将探讨国际政治对国内参与的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信