I am skeptical of our ability to predict, or even forecast, the future—of human rights or any other important social practice. Nonetheless, an understanding of the paths that have brought us to where we are today can facilitate thinking about the future. Thus, I approach the topic by examining the reshaping of international ideas and practices of state sovereignty and human rights since the end of World War II. I argue that in the initial decades after the war, international society constructed an absolutist conception of exclusive territorial jurisdiction that was fundamentally antagonistic to international human rights. At the same time, though, human rights were for the first time included among the fundamental norms of international society. And over the past two decades, dominant understandings of sovereignty have become less absolutist and more human rights–friendly, a trend that I suggest is likely to continue to develop, modestly, in the coming years.
To read the full text of this article, click here.
More in this issue
Summer 2014 (28.2) • Essay
Why Human Rights Are Called Human Rights
No one can engage in commerce when deprived of liberty or autonomy. No one can create or imagine or love when consumed by fear. We ...
Summer 2014 (28.2) • Review
Climate Matters: Ethics in a Warming World by John Broome
DALE JAMIESON This book greatly contributes to our attempts to meet the challenge of climate change and to answer the difficult questions that it raises.
Summer 2014 (28.2) • Review
Global Justice and Avant-Garde Political Agency by Lea Ypi
In this book, Ypi proposes that theory begin with a specific political conflict, diagnose the failure of existing practices and norms to resolve it, and, ...