2017
DOI: 10.1093/cjip/pox010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Are US Foreign Policy Tools Effective in Improving Human Rights Conditions?

Abstract: This is the first empirical study to evaluate, in combination, the relative impact of the US's four major foreign policy tools (i.e., military intervention, military assistance, economic sanctions, and economic assistance) on human rights conditions abroad. This study presents a Hegemonic Intervention Hypothesis, which cautions against US action to promote human rights, and a Coercion Hypothesis, which assesses punitive actions as likely to be more harmful than acts of assistance. Relying on a dataset of 144 c… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, Choi and James’ (2016) cross‐national, time‐series analysis shows that the United States is likely to undertake military campaigns for humanitarian reasons rather than for its security interests, such as democratization or terrorism reduction. Despite such a humanitarian intent, Choi and James (2017) also show in a later study that all forms of U.S. foreign policy intervention, including humanitarian military interventions, do not relate to improved levels of human rights in the target state.…”
Section: Standard Explanations Of the Kosovo Interventionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…For instance, Choi and James’ (2016) cross‐national, time‐series analysis shows that the United States is likely to undertake military campaigns for humanitarian reasons rather than for its security interests, such as democratization or terrorism reduction. Despite such a humanitarian intent, Choi and James (2017) also show in a later study that all forms of U.S. foreign policy intervention, including humanitarian military interventions, do not relate to improved levels of human rights in the target state.…”
Section: Standard Explanations Of the Kosovo Interventionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…29 Nevertheless, despite such a humanitarian intent, Choi and James also find that all forms of US foreign policy interventions, including humanitarian military interventions, do not correlate with improved levels of human rights in the target state, further complicating the theoretical debate on human rights versus national interest pursuits. 30 Interestingly, speckled throughout this spectrum of findings are brief mentions of geographic effects. Gilligan and Stedman, for instance, find no evidence of dominating national interests in UN interventions, except for geographical bias.…”
Section: Proposed Drivers Of the Selectivity Gapmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…e theoretical and practical research results on policy tools at home and abroad are very rich. e definition of policy tools has been summarized in the previous section, and the research results of the classification of policy tools and the selection of policy tools will be described next [17,18].…”
Section: Eoretical Research On Policy Toolsmentioning
confidence: 99%