2) How do international treaties differ from international organizations?

Answer 1

International treaties and international organizations are both important components of international relations, but they serve different functions and have distinct characteristics:

1. Definition:

• International Treaties: These are formal agreements between two or more sovereign states or international entities that are legally binding. Treaties are created to facilitate cooperation on various issues, such as trade, security, environment, and human rights.

• International Organizations: These are entities created by treaties or agreements to facilitate cooperation and dialogue among member states. Organizations like the United Nations (UN), World Trade Organization (WTO), and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) provide a framework for collaboration, discussion, and problem-solving on issues of common interest.

2. Structure:

• International Treaties: They are typically structured documents that outline the terms of the agreement, including the rights and responsibilities of the parties involved. They may include protocols or annexes detailing specific provisions.

• International Organizations: They have a defined institutional structure, including governing bodies (e.g., assemblies, councils, or committees), administration, and a secretariat. These organizations often have ongoing operations, including hosting meetings, conducting research, and implementing policies.

3. Purpose:

• International Treaties: The primary purpose of treaties is to formalize agreements and obligations between states. They provide a clear legal framework for managing relationships and addressing specific issues.

• International Organizations: The purpose of these organizations is broader; they aim to promote cooperation, peace, security, economic development, and social progress among member states. They often serve as platforms for negotiation, dialogue, and consensus-building.

4. Duration:

• International Treaties: Treaties can be of fixed duration or open-ended, and they can be amended or terminated based on the terms agreed upon by the parties.

• International Organizations: They are generally established for an indefinite period and persist as long as their member states maintain their interest and participation.

5. Membership:

• International Treaties: States or entities become parties to treaties through formal ratification, which can involve national legislative approval.

• International Organizations: Membership typically requires states to meet certain criteria, and they may have a process for joining (e.g., application, approval by existing members).

Conclusion:

In summary, international treaties are specific legal agreements between states, while international organizations are ongoing institutions that facilitate wider cooperation and dialogue among member states on various global issues.

Answer 2

Does this answer the question or no?
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) was adopted in 1989 and is often considered the most ratified human rights treaty in the world, with only two national governments not yet ratifying—those of Somalia and the United States. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, charged with monitoring national efforts to implement the CRC, has published General Comments. The UN Committee insists these General Comments bind ratifying national governments, but because national governments ratified the CRC, not the subsequent General Comments (the first was published in 2001, 12 years after CRC adoption and after all but five national governments had ratified), this study takes the General Comments as only interpretations. Adopted in 1990, 45 national governments out of 53 have ratified the ACRWC. The Child Welfare Vol. 90, No. 4 162 European Convention was open for signature in 1996. In the last 15 years, only 16 members of the Council of Europe have ratified. In contrast to these other treaties, the European Convention seems to have limited purpose of dealing with family matters. Out of eight SAARC members, seven have signed the SAARC convention since 2002.

Answer 3

The provided text primarily focuses on specific international treaties related to children's rights, their ratification status, and the monitoring mechanisms associated with them, particularly highlighting the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and other regional agreements. While it provides valuable context for understanding the CRC and compares it with other treaties, it does not directly address the question about the differences between international treaties and international organizations.

To make the answer more relevant to the original question, it could include explicit comparisons highlighting key areas such as the definitions, structures, purposes, and memberships of treaties versus organizations. This would help clarify how the CRC and similar treaties fit into the broader context of international law and organizations, such as how the UN plays a role as an international organization in facilitating the implementation and monitoring of such treaties.

In summary, the text does not answer the question directly; it could benefit from explicitly discussing the distinctions between international treaties and international organizations.

Answer 4

Does this answer anything?
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, resolution adopted unanimously in December 1948 by the UN General Assembly, United Nations. The objective of the 30-article declaration is to promote and encourage respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. The declaration proclaims the personal, civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights of humans, which are limited only by recognition for the rights and freedoms of others and the requirements of morality, public order, and general welfare. Among the rights cited by the declaration are the rights to life, liberty, and security of person; to freedom from arbitrary arrest; to a fair trial; to be presumed innocent until proven guilty; to freedom from interference with the privacy of one’s home and correspondence; to freedom of movement and residence; to asylum, nationality, and ownership of property; to freedom of thought, conscience, religion, opinion, and expression; to association, peaceful assembly, and participation in government; to social security, work, rest, and a standard of living adequate for health and well-being; to education; and to participation in the social life of one’s community. The declaration was conceived as the first part of an international bill of rights. The UN Commission on Human Rights directed its efforts to the incorporation of the main principles of the declaration into various international agreements.

Answer 5

The passage you provided discusses the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), outlining its objectives, main principles, and the rights it promotes. While this information is valuable and informative regarding the UDHR itself, it does not directly answer the question about the differences between international treaties and international organizations.

Key Points of the Passage:

1. Description of the UDHR: It explains that the UDHR was adopted by the UN General Assembly and outlines its goals related to human rights.
2. Content of the Declaration: It enumerates various rights and freedoms included in the UDHR.
3. Context within the UN: It mentions the role of the UN Commission on Human Rights in incorporating these principles into international agreements.

How It Relates to the Original Question:

While the UDHR is indeed a significant document in the realm of international human rights and is part of the broader context of international human rights law, the passage itself does not fulfill the request for a comparison between international treaties and international organizations.

To Address the Question:

To effectively answer the question, the text would need to:

• Define what international treaties are (e.g., legally binding agreements between states).
• Define what international organizations are (e.g., entities created for cooperation among countries).
• Illustrate the differences in structure, purpose, membership, and duration between treaties (like the UDHR) and organizations (like the United Nations as a whole).

In conclusion, while the passage provides relevant information about the UDHR, it does not address the distinctions between international treaties and international organizations directly.

Answer 6

UNESCO, ICRC, UNICEF, CEDAW, ICPR, etc. What do all of these international human rights treaties have in common? They are viewed to be failing in many of the countries in which they are ratified due to one of the biggest obstacles facing international human rights bodies: enforcement. Two main obstacles arise after ratification of treaties, lack of effective enforcement and the treaty reservation system. Through the treaty reservation system member states can make reservations to international law if the country is not able to incorporate fully every part of the treaty. Often this situation creates much controversy over the legitimacy of International Human Rights Law. Several countries have ratified legislation such as the International Convention for the Rights of the Child (CRC), and then have consequently made reservations that inevitably change the meaning and reasoning behind the initial convention. States such as Pakistan use religion and ‘traditional thinking’ as justification for not adhering to certain human rights legislations (Sudduth, 2009). It is the state that ratifies international human rights law, however it is also the state that fails to provide the human rights that they promised their citizens. Thus, begs the question that many scholars have been trying to answer, how do we enforce International Human Rights Law?

What about this?

Answer 7

The passage you provided discusses various international human rights mechanisms (such as UNESCO, ICRC, UNICEF, CEDAW, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights) and highlights common challenges they face, particularly regarding enforcement and the treaty reservation system. Here’s an analysis of how it relates to the question:

Common Theme:

1. Focus on Human Rights Treaties and Mechanisms: The passage identifies several international treaties and organizations that are aimed at promoting and protecting human rights.
2. Challenges in Enforcement: It highlights the significant issue of enforcement that plagues these treaties, noting that even after ratification, many countries fail to uphold the rights guaranteed by these instruments.
3. Treaty Reservations: It discusses how countries can make reservations when ratifying treaties, which can undermine the effectiveness and intent of the treaties.
4. Controversies Arising from Cultural Context: The mention of states like Pakistan using religion and traditional thinking to justify non-compliance underscores the complexities of implementing international human rights standards within diverse cultural frameworks.

Relation to Human Rights Law:

While the passage examines specific human rights treaties and the difficulties in enforcing them, it does not directly answer the question regarding the differences between international treaties and international organizations.

To Directly Address the Question:

To provide a complete answer to the distinction between international treaties and international organizations, the text would need to:

• Clarify that treaties (like CEDAW, CRC, etc.) are formal legal agreements that states ratify to commit to various human rights standards.
• Explain that international organizations (like UNESCO and UNICEF) are established entities that work towards the promotion and implementation of those treaties through various means, such as advocacy, education, and support for countries to comply with treaty obligations.

Takeaways:

• While your passage insightfully addresses the challenges of enforcing international human rights law and discusses the concepts of treaties and reservations, it stops short of contrasting treaties with the organizations designed to support their implementation.
• An effective response to the original inquiry would synthesize these insights with clear definitions and comparisons between the concepts of treaties and organizations as they relate to international human rights law.

Overall, while the passage does provide useful context on the challenges within international human rights law, it does not explicitly answer the question regarding the differences between international treaties and international organizations.

Answer 8

Does this answer the question or no?

The most common form of enforcement that comes from UN bodies and the international community is what Fredrick Kirgis calls “mobilization of shame” and the application of pressure. Many international human rights treaties, such as CRC, require parties that ratify the treaty to hold themselves accountable by reporting on their compliance with the treaty. “State parties are often told to send a representative to appear before treaty-monitoring bodies to explain how they have complied or why they have not” (Kirgis, 1996). From literature regarding enforcement of international human rights law, it is evident that the enforcement will most likely not come from the top, so it must start from the bottom. The bottom, in this sense, means grassroots movements in education that are working to implement an ethos of human rights into K-12 education. This leads to the central hypothesis of this paper: education, namely human rights education (HRE), is the biggest problem as well as the solution to the lack of enforcement of International Human Rights Law. HRE can be briefly described as an educational pedagogy aiming to use an ethos of human rights to can serve as a framework in which to teach. By looking at the problem of enforcement itself then exploring current human rights education initiatives and the theories behind them, one can begin to piece together a framework of what is and is not needed to successfully implement a human rights education initiative that mainstreams human rights and thus enforces international human rights treaties.

Answer 9

The passage you’ve provided discusses the challenges of enforcing international human rights law and emphasizes the role of grassroots movements and human rights education (HRE) as critical to both recognizing and addressing these enforcement issues. However, it does not directly answer the original question regarding the differences between international treaties and international organizations.

What the Passage Addresses:

1. Enforcement Mechanisms: It explores how enforcement typically occurs through public pressure, reporting obligations, and the “mobilization of shame” tactic.
2. State Accountability: The text notes the requirement for states that ratify treaties to report on compliance and the necessity for monitoring bodies.
3. Grassroots Movements: It proposes that enforcement should start from the bottom (grassroots efforts), particularly through human rights education.
4. Role of HRE: It posits that HRE is both a problem and a solution in bridging the enforcement gap for international human rights treaties.

Limitations Regarding the Original Question:

• No Direct Comparison: The passage does not compare or define international treaties and international organizations. It discusses enforcement of treaties but does not clarify that treaties are formal legal agreements that states commit to, while organizations (like the UN or UNESCO) are entities that help facilitate, monitor, and promote adherence to these treaties.
• Focus on Education and Enforcement: While it makes a compelling argument about HRE and its impact on enforcement, it does not touch on the structural differences or roles of international treaties versus international organizations.

Conclusion:

While the passage effectively addresses enforcement issues and the potential of human rights education as a solution, it does not answer the question about the differences between international treaties and international organizations. An effective response to the original question would need to involve clear definitions and comparisons of both concepts, alongside any relevant examples or mechanisms of enforcement, including the ones mentioned in your passage.

Answer 10

When one thinks of children’s rights, he or she usually thinks of two forms of rights. One form enables young people to shape their relationship with government. The other form allows young people to shape relationship with their parents (Guggenheim, 2005). Family
rights are based in and shape familial relationships (Connolly &Ward, 2008a, 2008b). Belonging to family members, family rights are similar to children’s rights, in that they can be used to shape relationships with family members and government, with parents and other adult
family members, such as grandparents, and with children (Minow,
1987b, p. 184; for a historical perspective,see Minow, 1987a).

When studying family rights, parents’ rights, and children’s rights, a vast forest of treaties, laws, codes, and other legal measures is found. International human rights treaties are a useful means for seeing the forest for the trees given high levels of their acceptance and impacts on law making, even for non ratifying governments. International treaties can shape policies and laws on family engagement in decision making on child welfare, such as identification of rights belonging to families, parents, and young people

Does this

Answer 11

The passage you provided discusses the relationship between children’s rights, family rights, and international human rights treaties. It highlights the dual nature of children's rights—how they relate both to government and familial relationships. It also touches on the complexity of family rights and their intersection with international law. However, similar to the previous passages, this excerpt does not directly address the question about the differences between international treaties and international organizations.

Key Aspects of the Passage:

1. Children’s Rights vs. Family Rights: It distinguishes between rights that help children interact with government entities and those that shape family dynamics.
2. Legal Framework: It emphasizes the abundance of treaties, laws, and codes related to family and children's rights, suggesting that international treaties can significantly influence domestic law and policy.
3. Impact on Policy: The passage notes that international treaties can affect how countries approach family engagement in decision-making about child welfare.

Limitations Regarding the Original Question:

• Focus on Rights and Legal Frameworks: While it introduces important concepts concerning children’s rights and family rights, it does not define or compare international treaties and international organizations.
• Lack of Distinction: The passage does not clarify the specific roles and functions of treaties (formal agreements between states) versus organizations (entities that facilitate cooperation and enforcement of treaties).

Conclusion:

Although the passage provides valuable insights into children's rights, familial relationships, and the role of international treaties in shaping legal frameworks, it does not answer the initial question regarding the differences between international treaties and international organizations.

To address the original question effectively, the response should include:

• Definitions of international treaties and their nature as legally binding agreements.
• Definitions of international organizations and their purpose in facilitating collaboration and enforcement.
• A comparison of their structures, roles, and implications in the context of human rights and related laws.

Overall, while the passage is relevant to the discussion of children's rights and family dynamics, it does not fulfill the requirement for a comparison between treaties and organizations.