Geography and Regional Planning

Geography and Regional Planning

A comparative study of Turkey and Saudi Arabia's adherence to international human rights norms

Authors
Sadegh Hosynzadeh 1
Amin Ravanbad 2
alimohamad haghighi 3
1 PhD student, Department of Political Science, Lamard Branch, Islamic Azad University, Lamard, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Lamard Branch, Islamic Azad University, Lamard, Iran.
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, Lamard Branch, Islamic Azad University, Lamard, Iran
10.22034/jgeoq.2024.289325.3121
Abstract
The main question of the current research is how to explain the adherence of Turkey and Saudi Arabia to global norms? Whenever there is a gap between the absolute norms of human rights and the actions of the government, a kind of social pressure is created for countries to comply. If global norms of human rights are considered as conditions for membership in a specific group or community of governments or as preconditions for strengthening and promoting relations between countries, then the social pressure will be much greater. In this study, the authors found out by using the descriptive-analytical method that both countries are under pressure from the international community to fully adhere to these norms due to the absolute nature of human rights norms. Turkey feels a double obligation to adhere to human rights norms both in the sense that adherence to human rights norms is a condition for membership in the European Union and from the perspective of the condition of improving relations. Saudi Arabia also feels significant pressure to adhere to human rights norms from the point of view of improving relations. Due to such social pressures, both countries have taken measures to strengthen adherence to human rights norms.
Keywords
Adherence
Tü
rkiye
Saudi Arabia
social pressure
global norms
سادات اخوی، سید علی؛ خداشناس، عباس. (1394). شورای حقوق بشر سازمان ملل متحد و وضعیت حقوق بشر در عربستان سعودی. مطالعات حقوق عمومی، 45(4)، 997-1000.
عباسی، مجید؛ عزیزی، احمد. (1397). سیاست حقوق بشری اتحادیه اروپا: مطالعه تطبیقی جمهوری اسلامی ایران و عربستان سعودی. فصلنامه سیاست خارجی، 32(2)، 30-55.
Busby, J. W. , & Greenhill, K. M. (2015). Ain’t that a shame? Hypocrisy, punishment, and weak actor influence in international politics. In R. H. Friman (Ed. ), The politics of leverage in international relations: Name, shame, and sanction (pp. 105–122). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Chayes, A. , & Chayes, A. H. (1993). On compliance. International Organization, 47(2), 175–205.
Checkel, J. (1997). International norms and domestic politics: Bridging the rationalist–constructivist divide. European Journal of International Relations, 3(4), 473–495.
Cortell, A. P. , & Davis, J. W. (2000). Understanding the domestic impact of international norms: A research agenda. International Studies Review, 2(1), 65–87.
Davutoglu, A. (2008). Turkey’s foreign policy vision: An assessment of 2007. Insight Turkey, 10(1).
Donnelly, J. (2006). Sovereign inequalities and hierarchy in anarchy: American power and international society. European Journal of International Relations, 12(2), 139–170.
Fearon, J. D. (1999). What is identity (as we now use the word)? Department of Political Science, Stanford University.
Finnemore, M. , & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), 887–917.
Hurrell, A. , & Macdonald, T. (2012). Norms and ethics in international relations. In B. A. Simmons, W. Carlsnaes, & T. Risse (Eds. ), Handbook of international relations. London: Sage Publications.
Katzenstein, P. J. (Ed. ). (1996). The culture of national security: Norms and identity in world politics. New York: Columbia University Press.
Kratochwil, F. (1984). The force of prescriptions. International Organization, 38(4), 685–708.
Lake, D. A. (2007). Escape from the state of nature: Authority and hierarchy in world politics. International Security, 32(1), 47–79.
March, J. G. , & Olsen, J. P. (2008). The logic of appropriateness. In R. E. Goodin, M. Moran, & M. Rein (Eds. ), The Oxford handbook of public policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nadelmann, E. (1990). Global prohibition regimes: The evolution of norms in international society. International Organization, 44(4).
Reus-smit, C. (2009). Constructivism. In C. Reus-smit, S. Burchill, A. Linklater, et al. (Eds. ), Theories of international relations (4th ed. ). New York: Palgrave.
Risse, T. (2000). “Let’s argue! ”: Communicative action in world politics. International Organization, 54(1), 1–40.
Risse, T. , Ropp, S. C. , & Sikkink, K. (1999). The power of human rights: International norms and domestic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sikkink, K. (1993). The power of principled ideas: Human rights policies in the United States and Western Europe. In J. Goldstein & R. O. Keohane (Eds. ), Ideas and foreign policy: Beliefs, institutions and political change. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Towns, A. E. , & Rmelili, B. (2017). Taking the pressure: Unpacking the relation between norms, social hierarchies and social pressures on states. European Journal of International Relations, 23(4).
Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
Wendt, A. (1999). Social theory of international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Young, O. R. (1992). The effectiveness of international institutions: Hard cases and critical variables. In J. N. Rosenau & E. -O. Czempiel (Eds. ), Governance without government: Order and change in world politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zuern, M. (1998). The rise of international environmental politics. World Politics, 50, 617–649