Carr Examines Rights and Powers

On Friday evening, Sarah Sewall, a lecturer in public policy and director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard University, discussed human rights and the use of force in contemporary society at the Politics of Human Rights Interdisciplinary Graduate Conference.

Friday's keynote lecture concluded the two-day interdisciplinary graduate student conference. The conference, sponsored by the Graduate Student Association of the political science department, brought together graduate students from multiple institutions, including Boston College, Georgetown University, and Harvard University, as well as leading scholars in human rights-related fields who presented research findings and prompted dialogue about pressing contemporary human rights issues.
"Boston College social science courses often focus on theory," said Elitsa Molles, Ph.D. student in the political science department and one of the coordinators. "This conference was aimed at focusing on the practical application of the theory presented in the classroom so as to advance discussion about pressing issues."

"Those who argue for progressively increasing strength of regulations limiting the use of force in conflict situations contain, in their argument, seeds for their own destruction," Sewall said. "The human rights advocacy community has approached the use of force from a highly idealistic and ethical trend that may not be attainable in an armed conflict environment."

Sewall supported her argument with the fact that, for those outside of the traditional law-abiding nations and organizations, such as guerrilla liberation movements and terrorist organizations, there lies a huge enforcement problem. This is made especially so because international law is often resolved through discourse between nations and involved parties, not by a standard judicial system.

New international norms and laws are continuously devised that strive toward limiting the harm inflicted on non-combatants, Sewall said. "As a result, those following the law must do more, but those who ignore the law continue to use outlawed force without prosecution," she said. "While the international impulse is good, the problem still exists. With the new laws, we are talking to the people who are already trying not to kill people."
Another issue with international law enforcement concerns the lack of incentives for nations demonstrating good behavior, Sewall said. As a solution, she proposed that diplomats and lawmakers "think strategically about efforts for limiting the use of force, see where force fits, and analyze the tradeoff between laws and more laws."

Ward Thomas, associate professor of political science at the College of the Holy Cross, agreed with Sewall. "There is a need for the strategic targeting of initiatives in regards to human rights and the use of force," he said.

Thomas said the application of a "moral but not perfectionist" solution to the use of force in international disputes, and proposed that the optimal solution would involve a partnership between both military and non-government organizations calling for peaceful conflict resolution processes.

"Wars are fought because [participating parties] view it as important and they desire to win," Thomas said.

"What is needed is a new Geneva to redesign laws," Thomas said. "We are not just talking about regulative norms but the constitutive norms as well, so we need all actors at the table."