Conditions for Successful Governance in the Conflict Between Humanitarianism and Sovereignty
This project investigates the conditions that enable norms to successfully be established and implemented in the context of clashing justice and sovereignty claims made by states. The key question addresses how states’ convergent and/or differing morals and conceptions of justice affect the establishment and implementation of global norms through the United Nations. We assess whether differing ideas of justice give rise to conflict among interacting states. Do divergent conceptions of justice hinder normative agreement between the negotiation partners, or even the realization of global forms of governance?
Multilateral negotiations have shown that demands for the legal codification of global human rights norms – particularly in the policy area of security – is met with resistance from states which refuse such a conditioning of their national sovereignty. Negotiations for the international Arms Trade Treaty only granted marginal attention to calls for greater consideration of human rights issues in the area of evaluating weapons exports. In two rounds of bargaining, negotiations likewise failed on account of justice issues. Unresolved conflicts over justice often reemerge in the implementation and application phases for a given norm – as evidenced in the example of the international Responsibility to Protect (R2P).
This project analyzes debates present in the UN Security Council the UN General Assembly; it makes use of a content analysis and compares three policy areas:
- Humanitarian intervention: The “Responsibility to Protect” represents a new norm aimed at defending human rights. It justifies actions spanning from conditioning sovereignty to the use of military force, even without prior consent of the affected state’s government. However, efforts to establish a doctrine for humanitarian intervention that would have made such intrusions possible without consent from the UN Security Council proved unsuccessful.
- Humanitarian arms control: the areas of small arms control and the international Arms Trade Treaty are both host to divergent moral convictions and perceptions of justice that pursue the establishment and implementation of norms. At the same time, the protection of national sovereignty – such as the right to self-defense according to article 51 of the UN Charter – limits efforts to establish international regulations.
- Violence towards women: gender-specific human rights permeate the security sector and appear in norms such as UNSC Resolution 1325 “Women, Peace and Security”. Conflicts related to perceptions of justice arise over issues such as the reach of the norms in question, selectivity in their implementation, and their encroachment into domestic jurisdiction.
The findings from this research area seek to make both theoretical and practical contributions. As such, the project aims to develop a theory of empirical universalism that identifies the scope and limits of perceptions of justice in respect to conditioning state sovereignty. The project likewise sets out to develop practical strategies that can be applied to negotiations that involve setting and implementing contested norms.
- Ten Years R2P – What Doesn‘t Kill a Norm Only Makes It Stronger? | 2015
Gregor P. Hofmann, Ten Years R2P – What Doesn‘t Kill a Norm Only Makes It Stronger? Contestation, Application and Institutionalization of International Atrocity Prevention and Response, PRIF-Report No. 133, Frankfurt /M., 2015.
- Download publication // Show details
- Im Streit gestärkt oder umstrittener als behauptet? | 2014
Gregor Hofmann, Im Streit gestärkt oder umstrittener als behauptet? Zehn Jahre diplomatische Kontroversen über die Schutzverantwortung, HSFK-Report Nr. 9/2014, Frankfurt/M.
- Download publication // Show details
- Global Governance Efforts in Tension between Humanitarian Concerns and Statist Sovereignty Rights | 2014
Gregor P. Hofmann/Simone Wisotzki, Global Governance Efforts in Tension between Humanitarian Concerns and Statist Sovereignty Rights, in: International Negotiation, Jg. 19, Nr. 3, 2014, S. 487–517.
- Show details