نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استاد حقوق، دانشگاه کبک، مونترال

چکیده

حقوق بشر، به طور نمادین  از سال 1948 و توسط اعلامیه جهانی حقوق بشر (UDHR) برجسته شده است. حقوق بشر در قالب حقوق بشر بین المللی، میانبری میان صلح و دین در سطوح بنیادین می‌باشد. در اولین خط از مقدمه این اعلامیه بیان می‌شود که احترام به کرامت انسانی پایه و اساس صلح است. اعلامیه همچنین تاکید می‌کند که آزادی عقیده در کنار آزادی بیان و آزادی از ترس، بالاترین آرمان‌های بشریت است. همانند رابطه آزادی بیان و آزادی از ترس می‌توان رابطه ویژه‌ای بین حقوق بشر، صلح و مذهب، به ویژه تحمل دین، در متن منشور سازمان ملل متحد 1945 و همچنین در متن کلیه اسناد جهانی و منطقه ای، که از سال 1948 به تصویب رسیده‌اند مشاهده کرد.
رابطه بین حقوق بشر معاصر از یک سو و مذهب و صلح از سوی دیگر، توسط ساختار حقوق بشر بین المللی به عنوان یک گفتمان سیاسی که رابطه بین افراد، دولت و جامعه را تعیین می‌کند، مشخص می‌شود. تأثیر قابل ملاحظة نظریه قرارداد اجتماعی در لغات و کلمات «اعلامیه جهانی حقوق بشر» به ما یادآوری می‌کند که از ابتدا تا کنون پروژه حقوق بشر با تنوع مذهبی (به دلیل ظهور حاکمیت مدرن در جنگهای دینی و امپریالیسم اروپایی) و صلح (به دلیل ارتباطی که اعلامیه در ثبات روابط بین کشورها و احترام به کرامت انسانی شهروندان ترسیم می‌کند) به شدت در ارتباط بوده است.
در برابر این پس زمینه مفهومی و تاریخی شناخته شده، مقاله حاضر با جابجایی حقوق بشر توسط گفتمان مبهم «امنیت انسانی» در سطح جهانی از زمان 1990 شروع می‌شود. بر اساس یک نظر کلی «امنیت انسانی» که به سرعت در حال تبدیل شدن به یک اصل سازماندهی سیاست گذاری برای دولت‌ها و همچنین سازمان‌های غیر دولتی و بین دولتی است، به منزله یک جایگزین است. گاهی بر اساس عقل سلیم حقوق بشر تهدیدی برای حاکمیت دولت‌هاست، مواجهه حقوق بشر و امنیت انسانی آشکار می‌سازد که اولا که چگونه حقوق بشر ملزم به حاکمیت است دوما چگونه  «امنیت انسانی» به پارامترهای سیاسی اشاره می‌کند که خارج اعلامیه جهانی حقوق بشر هستند. به این ترتیب، این مقاله رابطه ساختاری عمیق بین صلح و دین را بررسی می‌کند. همچنین در این مقاله مسئله برابری در تنوع که در حقوق بین الملل توسط اعلامیه جهانی حقوق بشر توسعه یافته است، توسط پروژه کلی «حکومت جهانی» کنار گذاشته شده است.
از لحاظ روش شناختی، این مقاله به دنبال ایجاد یک پس زمینه مفهومی سازمان یافته و منسجم است. این پس زمینه به منظوره مقابله با مخالفت‌های جدید گروهی از دولت‌ها در به کارگیری «امنیت انسانی» در سازمان ملل متحد و فرای آن می‌باشد. این پس زمینه از طریق استفاده از مفهوم فنی «الاهیات سیاسی» که جایگاه بنیادین دین در گفتمان سیاسی را با توصیف زبان سیاسی ـ نظری (مانند اعلامیه جهانی) به نسخه‌های سکولار جهان بینی دینی  نظام‌مند می‌کند، ایجاد شده است. این رویکرد شرایط مقابله سازنده بین حقوق بشر و امنیت انسانی، به عنوان پروژه‌های موازی سیاسی را فراهم می‌کند. در این رویکرد توضیح داده می‌شود که پروژه امنیت انسانی که  با دیگر مفاهیم استراتژیک حکومت جهانی (مثل مسئولیت حمایت) در ارتباط می‌باشد، تهدیدی برای معماری ساختار حقوق بشر بین المللی می‌باشد. به نظر می‌رسد که این تهدید از خصومت بالقوه امنیت انسانی نسبت به حاکمیت در حقوق بشر بین المللی و اصل برابر در عین تفاوت در حقوق بشر ناشی می‌شود.

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Human Rights, Human Security and Political Theologies

نویسنده [English]

  • Alejandro Lorite Escorihuela

Proffessor of Law, Universite du Q vebec a Montreal

چکیده [English]

Human rights, particularly in the form of international human rights law, intersect with religion and peace at foundational levels, as symbolically highlighted by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The Preamble to the Declaration proclaims in its very first line that respect for human dignity is the foundation of peace, and proceeds to declare that freedom of belief, alongside freedom of speech and freedom from fear, are the highest aspirations of humankind. One could similarly highlight the special relationship between the project of human rights, peace and religion, particularly religious tolerance, in the texts of the universal, as well as regional, human rights instruments adopted since 1948, as well as the text of the Charter of the United Nations of 1945.
The relationship between contemporary human rights, on the one hand, and religion and peace on the other, is arguably determined by the structure of international human rights law as a political discourse, which describes the relationship between individuals, society and the State. The visible influence of social contract theory on the wording of the Universal Declaration reminds us that from its inception, the project of human rights is intimately linked to religious diversity (because of the birth of modern sovereignty in European wars of religion and evangelical imperialism) and peace (because of the connection that the Declaration draws between the stability of States and respect for the human dignity of citizens).
Against this known conceptual and historical backdrop, this paper starts with the displacement, at the global level, of human rights by the ambiguous discourse of "human security," since the early 1990s. A general idea is that "human security", which has rapidly evolved to become an organizing principle of policy-making for governments as well as non-governmental and inter-governmental organizations, constitutes an alternative, sometimes deliberately advocated as such, to the discourse of human rights. Although received, and arguably uninformed, commonsense considers human rights as a threat to State sovereignty, the confrontation of human rights with "human security" reveals, first, how human rights is bound to sovereignty and, second, how "human security" refers to political parameters that are foreign to those of the UDHR. In that sense, this paper discusses how the structurally very deep relationship between peace, religion, and the project of equality in diversity promoted within international law by the UDHR is sidelined by the general project of "global governance," to which "human security" has contributed a legitimate basis for disregarding the sovereignty on which human rights depend.
Methodologically, the paper seeks to bring together a structured and coherent conceptual backdrop to the resistance offered more recently by a group of States to the continuous use of "human security" within the United Nations and beyond. This is done through the use of the technical notion of "political theology," which systematizes the foundational place of religion in political discourse by describing political-theoretical language (such as that of the Universal Declaration) as secularized versions of religious worldviews. This allows for a constructive confrontation of human rights and "human security" as parallel political projects, in a way that describes the project of "human security," connected as it is with other strategic concepts of global governance (like the "responsibility to protect"), as a threat to the original architecture of international human rights law. This threat is shown to derive from "human security's" potential hostility to both human rights' international law component (sovereignty) as well as its human rights component (equality in diversity), particularly by associating humanitarian concerns with the passing security concerns of dominant States. 

A) Books and Journals

  1. A Human Security Doctrine for Europe, 15 September 2004.
  2. Arendt, Hannah (1958). The Origins of Totalitarianism, Cleveland: Meridian.
  3. Axworthy, Lloyd (2001), “Human Security and Global Governance”, Global Governance, Vol.7, pp. 19-23.
  4. Bailliet, Cecilia (2003). “The Tampa Case and its Impact on Burden Sharing at Sea”, Human Rights Quarterly, Vol.25, No.3, pp. 741-774.
  5. Burgess, P. J. & TaylorSpecial, O. (2004). “Section: What is Human Security?”, Security Dialogue, Vol.35, No.3, pp. 345-371.
  6. Chandler, David (2008). “Human Security II: Waiting for the Tail to Wag the Dog”, Security Dialogue, Vol.39, No.4, pp. 463-469.
  7. Chandler, David (2008). “Human Security: The Dog that Didn’t Bark”, Security Dialogue, Vol. 39, No.4, p.427.
  8. Duffield, Mark & Waddell, Nicholas (2006). “Securing Humans in a Dangerous World”, International Politics, Vol.43, pp. 1–23.
  9. Duffield, Mark (2001). Global Governance and the New Wars, New York: Zed Books.
  10. Duffield, Mark (2008). “Global Civil War: The Non-Insured, International Containment and Post-Interventionary Society”, Journal of Refugee Studies, Vol.21, No.2, pp. 145-165.
  11. Duffield, Mark (2008). Development, Security and the Unending War: Governing the World of Peoples, Cambridge/Malden: Polity Press.
  12. Duffield, Mark (2008). Development, Security, and the Unending War: Governing the World of Peoples, Cambridge/Malden: Polity Press.
  13. E. Merriam, Charles (1906). “Hobbes’ Doctrine of the State of Nature”, Proceedings of the American Political Science Association, Vol.3, pp. 151-7.
  14. Ewan, Pauline (2007). “Deepening the Human Security Debate: Beyond the Politics of Conceptual Clarification”, Politics, Vol.27, p.3.
  15. Ewan, Pauline (2007). “Deepening the Human Security Debate: Beyond the Politics of Conceptual Clarification”, Politics, Vol.27(3), pp.182–189.
  16. Foucault, Michel (1976). Histoire de la sexualité I : La volonté de savoir, Paris: Gallimard.
  17. Foucault, Michel (1997). Il faut défendre la société, Paris: Gallimard/Seuil.
  18. Foucault, Michel (2004). Securité, territoire, population, Paris: Gallimard/Seuil, pp. 22-25.
  19. Giorgio Agamben (1998). Homo Sacer:Soveriegn Power and Bare Life, Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 104-111.
  20. Glasius, Marlies (2006). “The EU Response to the Tsunami and the Need for a Human Security Approach”, European Foreign Affairs Review, Vol.11, No.3, pp. 353-378.
  21. Gregor Noll (2003). “The Exclusionary Construction of Human Rights in International Law and Political Theory”, IIIS Discussion Paper, No.10.
  22. Henderson, John Sakej (1997). “The Context of the State of Nature”, Ed: by Marie Battiste, Reclaiming Indigenous Voice and Vision, Vancouver: UBC Press, pp. 11-38.
  23. Henk, Dan (2005). “Human Security: Relevance and Implications”, Parameters, Vol.35, No.2.
  24. Human Security Now, 2003.
  25. In Thomas Hobbes (1996). Leviathan, Chapter XIII, Ed: by Richard Tuck, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 90.
  26. Kaldor, Mary (2007). Human Security: Reflections on Globalization and Intervention, Cambridge: Polity Press.
  27. Kennedy, David (2002). “The International Human Rights Movement: Part of the Problem?”, Harvard Human Rights Journal, Vol.15, No.19.
  28. Koskenniemi, Martti (2002). “The Lady Doth Protest Too Much’: Kosovo and the Turn to Ethics in International Law”, The Modern Law Review, Vol.65, pp. 159-175.
  29. Liotta, P.H. (2002). “Boomerang Effect: The Convergence of National and Human Security”, Security Dialogue, Vol.33, No.4.
  30. Locke, John (1980). Second Treatise of Government, Indianapolis: Hackett.
  31. Mark, Karl (1978), On the Jewish Question, New York: Norton, pp.26-52.
  32. Martti Koskenniemi (1999). “The Effect of Rights in Political Culture”, The European Union and Human Rights, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 99-116.
  33. McFarlane, S. Neil & Khong, Yuen Foong (2006). Human Security and the UN, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
  34. Nef, Jorge (1999). Human Security and Mutual Vulnerability: The Global Political Economy of Development and Underdevelopment, Ottawa: IDRC.
  35. Paris, Roland (2005). “Rational and Irrational Approaches to Human Security: A Reply to Ralph Pettman”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol.18, No.3, pp. 479-81.
  36. Petman, Ralph (2005). “Human Security as Global Security: Reconceptualising Strategic Studies”, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, Vol.18, No.1, pp.137–150.
  37. Pugh, Michael (2004). “Peacekeeping and Critical Theory”, International Peacekeeping, Vol.11, No.1, pp. 39-58.
  38. Rancière, Jacques (2004). “Who is the Subject of the Rights of Man?”, The South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol.103, No.2/3, pp. 297-310.
  39. Schmitt, Carl (1988). Political Theology: Four Chapters on Sovereignty, Translated by George Schwab, Cambridge: MIT Press.
  40. Steyn, Johan (2004). “Guantanamo Bay: The Legal Black Hole”, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol.35, No.1, pp. 1-15.
  41. Thakur, Ramesh. “From National Security to Human Security”, The Japan Times, 13 October 2005.
  42. Thomas, Nicholas & T. Tow, William (2002). “Gaining Security by Trashing the State? A Reply to Bellamy & McDonald”, Security Dialogue, Vol.33, No.3.
  43. UNDP (1994). Human Development Report, Oxford: Oxford University Press
  44. Vatter, Miguel (2004). “Strauss and Schmitt as Readers of Hobbes and Spinoza: On the Relation between Political Theology and Liberalism”, The New Centennial Review, Vol.4, No.3, pp. 161-214.
  45. Waddell, Mark and Waddell, Nicholas (2006). “Securing Humans in a Dangerous World”, International Politics, Vol.43, No.1.
  46. Weigel, Sigrid (2006). “The Critique of Violence, or: The Challenge to Political Theology of Just Wars and Terrorism With a Religious Face”, Telos, No.135, pp.61-76.
  47. Wilkin, Peter (2000). “Global Poverty and Orthodox Security”, Third World Quarterly, Vol.23, p.4.

B) Documents

  1. Human Security Centre (2005), Human Security Report, Vancouver: University of British Columbia.
  2. International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (2001). The Responsibility to Protect, Ottawa: IDRC.
  3. Nottebohm case, 1955 ICJ Reports 4.
  4. Regina v. Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another (Respondents) ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others (Appellants) (2004).
  5. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, UN Doc. A/RES/42/187, 11 December 1987, Annex, Chapter 3.
  6. UN Doc. A/47/277 - S/24111, 17 June 1992, §16. 

C) Websites

  1. “Philippines: New Terrorism Law Puts Rights at Risk”, Human Rights Watch, 15 July 2005, available at: http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2007/07/15/philippines-new-terrorism-law-puts-rights-risk (Accessed 20 December 2008).
  2. Commission on Human Security, Human Security Now, New York (2003), Available at: http://www.humansecurity-chs.org/finalreport/index.html.
  3. Diplomatic Bluebook 2006, Chapter 3, entitled “Efforts to Tackle Various Global Challenges to Promote Human Security”, http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/other /bluebook/2006/index.html.
  4. Helsinki Process, Empowering People at Risk: Human Security Priorities for the 21st Century, Working Paper for the Helsinki Process Report of the Track on “Human Security” (2005), Available at: http://www.helsinkiprocess.fi/ netcomm/ImgLib/53/.
  5. HIV/AIDS and Security, UNAIDS Factsheet, August 2003, Available at: data.unaids.org/Topics/Security/fs_security_en.pdf (accessed December 20, 2008).
  6. HIV/AIDS as a Security Issue, Issues Report Nov.19 June 2001, Available At: http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=1831 (accessed December 20, 2008).
  7. http://ochaonline.un.org/Home/tabid/2097/Default.aspx.
  8. http://www.eda.admin.ch/eda/en/home/topics/peasec/sec/humsec.html (accessed on 20 December 2008).
  9.  http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/oda/sector/security/action.html.
  10. Journal of Human Security, http://www.rmitpublishing.com.au/jhs.html;
  11. Ottaway, Marina and Mair, Stefan “States at Risk and Failed States: Putting Security First”, Policy Outlook, Democracy & Rule of Law Project, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, September 2004, Available at: http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=15862).
  12. Presentation and documents on the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan at: http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/human_secu/friends/index.html (accessed 20 December 2008).
  13. Revue de la sécurité humaine/ Human Security Review, published by the CERI Program for Peace and Human Security at the IEP (Sciences Po) Paris, www.peacecenter.sciences-po.fr/journal/.
  14. www.hpcr.org/pdfs/HPCR_-_Bibliography_on_Human_Security_-_2001.pdf.

 

CAPTCHA Image