鸡窝里的狐狸:中国、规范变革和联合国人权理事会

IF 1 2区 社会学 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Alexander Dukalskis
{"title":"鸡窝里的狐狸:中国、规范变革和联合国人权理事会","authors":"Alexander Dukalskis","doi":"10.1080/14754835.2023.2193971","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Decades of social science research on human rights has mapped the conditions under which states sign and ratify treaties, abide by their conditions, and promote or criticize human rights in other states. Some norms contained in the core human rights treaties, particularly civil and political rights, are seen by authoritarian states as politically threatening. Autocracies can reshape human rights through international institutions and seek to change their content over time. This article investigates China’s engagement in the UN Human Rights Council, focusing on both the content and practices of the People’s Republic of China’s approach. In terms of content, it examines China’s voting record to determine the issues it prioritizes. In terms of practices, it identifies four modes of pursuing normative change: mobilizing like-mindedness, implied coercion, tactical deception, and repression of critical voices. These modes capture a range of activity in and around multilateral institutions, some of which usually does not draw scholarly attention in studies of normative change. The findings provide insights into the future of human rights norms in the United Nations and beyond.","PeriodicalId":51734,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A fox in the henhouse: China, normative change, and the UN Human Rights Council\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Dukalskis\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14754835.2023.2193971\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Decades of social science research on human rights has mapped the conditions under which states sign and ratify treaties, abide by their conditions, and promote or criticize human rights in other states. Some norms contained in the core human rights treaties, particularly civil and political rights, are seen by authoritarian states as politically threatening. Autocracies can reshape human rights through international institutions and seek to change their content over time. This article investigates China’s engagement in the UN Human Rights Council, focusing on both the content and practices of the People’s Republic of China’s approach. In terms of content, it examines China’s voting record to determine the issues it prioritizes. In terms of practices, it identifies four modes of pursuing normative change: mobilizing like-mindedness, implied coercion, tactical deception, and repression of critical voices. These modes capture a range of activity in and around multilateral institutions, some of which usually does not draw scholarly attention in studies of normative change. The findings provide insights into the future of human rights norms in the United Nations and beyond.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51734,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Human Rights\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2023.2193971\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2023.2193971","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

几十年来对人权的社会科学研究描绘了各国签署和批准条约、遵守条约条件以及促进或批评其他国家人权的条件。核心人权条约中包含的一些规范,特别是公民权利和政治权利,被威权国家视为具有政治威胁性。独裁政权可以通过国际机构重塑人权,并寻求随着时间的推移改变其内容。本文调查了中国参与联合国人权理事会的情况,重点介绍了中华人民共和国参与人权理事会的内容和做法。在内容方面,它审查了中国的投票记录,以确定其优先考虑的问题。在实践方面,它确定了追求规范变革的四种模式:动员式思维、隐含的胁迫、战术欺骗和压制批评声音。这些模式涵盖了多边机构内部和周围的一系列活动,其中一些在研究规范变化时通常不会引起学术界的注意。研究结果为联合国及其他机构人权规范的未来提供了见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A fox in the henhouse: China, normative change, and the UN Human Rights Council
Abstract Decades of social science research on human rights has mapped the conditions under which states sign and ratify treaties, abide by their conditions, and promote or criticize human rights in other states. Some norms contained in the core human rights treaties, particularly civil and political rights, are seen by authoritarian states as politically threatening. Autocracies can reshape human rights through international institutions and seek to change their content over time. This article investigates China’s engagement in the UN Human Rights Council, focusing on both the content and practices of the People’s Republic of China’s approach. In terms of content, it examines China’s voting record to determine the issues it prioritizes. In terms of practices, it identifies four modes of pursuing normative change: mobilizing like-mindedness, implied coercion, tactical deception, and repression of critical voices. These modes capture a range of activity in and around multilateral institutions, some of which usually does not draw scholarly attention in studies of normative change. The findings provide insights into the future of human rights norms in the United Nations and beyond.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
21.10%
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