Entre juridisme et constructivisme : les droits de l’homme dans la politique étrangère américaine
Nicolas Guilhot
The sociology of international norms has often focused on
human rights in order to illustrate the 'power of ideas' to inform policies: as
the story goes, the successful institutionalization of human rights principles
under the Carter administration forced the Reagan administration to adjust
its policies to principles it could not uproot or use for purely legitimating
purposes. The paper argues that these approaches ignore the disputed
nature of political-legal concepts and the fact that their very definition is at
stake in struggles between contending groups of actors seeking to use these
concepts in order to legitimate different policy courses. Mapping out the
field of producers of the human rights discourse in the late 1970s-early
1980s, both in their civil and governmental components, the paper shows
that the concept of human rights can be construed in two different ways,
each corresponding to specific social groups and policy interests: one that
anchors human rights in the field of international law, promoted essentially
by lawyers or activists connected with international organizations; the
other turning it into an anti-juridical concept primarily concerned with
political regimes and "democracy promotion," and elaborated by neoconservative policy makers.
• Un instrument de limitation de la souveraineté
• Au-delà du formalisme juridique : droits socioéconomiques et démocratie
• Le positivisme juridique… au service de la morale
• La promotion de la démocratie et le dépassement du droit international