Advocacy, human rights, and foreign policy: the case of Rwanda

Abstract

[ACCESS RESTRICTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI AT AUTHOR'S REQUEST.] The United States, uniquely positioned as a world leader, has the ability and the wherewithal to encourage and promote acceptance and adherence to human rights guarantees globally. However, activists have failed to convince policymakers to reverse their historic inclination to pursue economic and national security interests over human rights in foreign policy. These activists have continually urged policymakers to prioritized human rights as a major foreign policy aim because of moral obligations. This strategy not only failed during the ratification of the UN Genocide Convention but it also failed to convince policymakers to intervene during the genocide in Rwanda. Advocates, if they wish to gain recognition for human rights in foreign policy, must begin to position human rights pursuits as analogous to one of the historic drivers of American foreign affairs. An analysis of the case of Rwanda suggests that a strategy that equated intervention and attention to human rights with economic benefit could have effectively been made.