東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Domestic Politics, International Ina...

van der Veen, Alicia Marie.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Domestic Politics, International Inaction: The United States and Human Rights Treaties.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Domestic Politics, International Inaction: The United States and Human Rights Treaties./
作者:	van der Veen, Alicia Marie.
面頁冊數:	92 p.
附註:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 51-04.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International51-04(E).
標題:	Political Science, International Relations. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=1531192
ISBN:	9781267826787

Domestic Politics, International Inaction: The United States and Human Rights Treaties.
van der Veen, Alicia Marie.

Domestic Politics, International Inaction: The United States and Human Rights Treaties. - 92 p.

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 51-04.

Thesis (M.A.)--The George Washington University, 2012.

Despite being a proponent of human rights on the world stage and having some of the strongest protections of these rights at home, the United States has not ratified three major international human rights treaties: on the rights of women, children, and persons with disabilities. What causes this discrepancy? Though they are crafted in the international sphere, treaties are debated in the domestic---in the U.S. Senate---and thus become a political issue. Small but vocal groups feel threatened by a loss of sovereignty and an attack on values, and mobilize to lobby their Senators against these treaties. A larger group who favors ratification for the moral example it sets and the credibility gained on the world stage is not directly affected by the treaties---because these rights are so well enshrined at home---and therefore does not share this same incentive to mobilize. These arguments also tend to fall down political party lines, especially for the treaties on women's and children's rights, which deal with sensitive areas of the family and parenting. Structural impediments also play a part: one powerful Senator can block action for years, and the threshold to pass a convention is very high. These factors, combined with a general U.S. skepticism of the United Nations that is traced back to the organization's founding, and questions on the effectiveness of treaties as tools of change result in U.S. ambivalence on international human rights treaties.

ISBN: 9781267826787Subjects--Topical Terms:

1669648
Political Science, International Relations.

Domestic Politics, International Inaction: The United States and Human Rights Treaties.
LDR:02351nam a2200277 4500 001 1964846
005 20141013105129.5
008 150210s2012 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781267826787
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI1531192
035 $a AAI1531192
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a van der Veen, Alicia Marie. $3 2101373
245 1 0 $a Domestic Politics, International Inaction: The United States and Human Rights Treaties.
300 $a 92 p.
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 51-04.
500 $a Advisers: Susan K. Sell; Martha Finnemore.
502 $a Thesis (M.A.)--The George Washington University, 2012.
520 $a Despite being a proponent of human rights on the world stage and having some of the strongest protections of these rights at home, the United States has not ratified three major international human rights treaties: on the rights of women, children, and persons with disabilities. What causes this discrepancy? Though they are crafted in the international sphere, treaties are debated in the domestic---in the U.S. Senate---and thus become a political issue. Small but vocal groups feel threatened by a loss of sovereignty and an attack on values, and mobilize to lobby their Senators against these treaties. A larger group who favors ratification for the moral example it sets and the credibility gained on the world stage is not directly affected by the treaties---because these rights are so well enshrined at home---and therefore does not share this same incentive to mobilize. These arguments also tend to fall down political party lines, especially for the treaties on women's and children's rights, which deal with sensitive areas of the family and parenting. Structural impediments also play a part: one powerful Senator can block action for years, and the threshold to pass a convention is very high. These factors, combined with a general U.S. skepticism of the United Nations that is traced back to the organization's founding, and questions on the effectiveness of treaties as tools of change result in U.S. ambivalence on international human rights treaties.
590 $a School code: 0075.
650 4 $a Political Science, International Relations. $3 1669648
650 4 $a Political Science, International Law and Relations. $3 1017399
690 $a 0601
690 $a 0616
710 2 $a The George Washington University. $b International Affairs. $3 1679744
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 51-04(E).
790 $a 0075
791 $a M.A.
792 $a 2012
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=1531192