clear

Creating new perspectives since 2009

The Geopolitics of Shaming: When Human Rights Pressure Works - and When It Backfires

July 18, 2024 at 9:26 am

The Geopolitics of Shaming: When Human Rights Pressure Works - and When It Backfires
  • Book Author(s): Rochelle Terman
  • Published Date: October 2023 
  • Publisher: Princeton University Press 
  • Paperback: 216 pages
  • ISBN-13: 978-0691250489

In 2010, Iran came under international pressure to halt an execution of a woman for adultery; she had been sentenced to death by stoning. Tehran was used to receiving such condemnation and normally the Islamic Republic weathers the storm, but this time it was different. Criticism of Iran came from the usual quarters in the European Union, the United States and others, but perhaps surprisingly to decision makers in Iran, Brazil joined the criticism. President Lula Da Silva had a good relationship with the then Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Ahmadinejad had visited Da Silva in Brasilia and was the first Iranian leader to visit the South American country. Ahmadinejad made a big push to charm Latin American countries by opening embassies, expanding trade and developing ties, Da Silva’s intervention would play a key role in Iran dropping the sentence. Why did Brazil’s criticism mean so much to Iran but the United States’ so little? ‘Because of their existing strategic partnership, Brazil’s interference threatened greater relational costs on the Islamic Republic,’ writes Rochelle Terman in her new book The Geopolitics of Shaming: When Human Rights Pressure Works – and When It Backfires.

Terman’s book aims to explore the ways human rights shaming works, why it is done and what impact it has. Examining the empirical record and proposing theories as to why shaming sometimes works and other times backfires, the political scientist at the University of Chicago aims to give a more critical approach to the study of human rights and state behaviours. Her approach is a relational one, meaning to understand states’ behaviour, we have to view them as self-interested and wanting to protect and expand those interests. States achieve this by establishing relationships to other states, the nature of these relationships determines the impact shaming has. Examining the record, Terman observes, ‘Shaming by a strategic partner is more effective for two reasons…First, when states shame their partners, they impose greater direct relational costs…Second, shaming by friends and allies inflicts greater reputational damage because it is more credible.’ However, the cost of criticising an ally is high and so states tend to either muted or waterdown any criticism of a strategic partner’s violation of human rights. An example of this cited is Canada’s 2014 Iran and Saudi Arabia review – the Canadian government reviewed sensitive areas such as freedom of speech, the death penalty and minority rights. The review made harsher demands of the Iranian government including recommendations to change specific laws, punishments for officials involved in abuses and other measures. Whereas with Saudi Arabia, the review used vague and more indetermine language and attempted to avoid incriminating the Saudi government itself.

 

BOOK REVIEW: Elastic Empire: Refashioning War through Aid in Palestine

As Terman points out, shaming is more common from adversaries than allies, but has much less positive impact in regards to enforcing compliance with the human rights norm in question. Indeed, attacks from adversaries can sometimes bolster the popularity of a leader or regime at a local level as they can project strength and defiance. Indeed, some of the evidence suggests some human rights norm violations may have occurred with international condemnation in mind. Terman cites the example of Vladimir Putin’s 2013, ‘anti-gay propaganda’ law, which aimed to outlaw the presentation of LGBT communities as part of Russia’s social fabric to minors. Casting himself as the defender of traditional values, Vladimir Putin saw a spike in his approval ratings in Russia as western criticism rolled in. Improving domestic standings by provoking an international outcry might have been a key driver behind Russia’s decision to pass the law. The reasons why a state might engage in shaming broadly fall into two categories, firstly, a metaethical commitment to upholding certain moral values and secondly, to degrade, destablise or delegitimise an opponent. The two motivates sometimes go hand in hand and other times conflict. The conflict arises between the two positions when condemnation from an adversary makes the target state less likely to comply with the norm. The reason for wanting to enforce a norm seems to fall into two broad areas, either because it is seen as morally right or because it enhances a state’s interest/security. Stopping the spread of chemical weapons might be a moral good, but it is also within a state’s interest to make a mass catastrophe event less likely.

However, as Terman’s findings suggests, ‘international shaming has the counterproductive effect on public attitudes of heightening nationalist sentiments and hostility toward advocacy efforts. Importantly, these defensive reactions are not reducible to preexisting beliefs regarding specific human rights issues or the content of relevant norms. Indeed, foreign shaming can incite defensive reactions even among those individuals who are otherwise sympathetic to human rights causes.’  The Geopolitics of Shaming offers the reader plenty to chew over with regards to thinking about the efficacy and effectiveness of human rights shaming. The argument is not that we should give up on human rights advocacy, but rather we should look at the evidence available to us to consider what the most effective strategy might be for ensuring compliance with human rights norms. The book offers a solid basis in which to interrogate shaming and think through its impacts – it is thus a necessary read for policymakers and activists alike.

BOOK REVIEW: The Palestine Laboratory: How Israel expands the technology of occupation around the world