2) How do international treaties differ from international organizations?

Answer 1

International treaties and international organizations are both important elements of international relations, but they serve different purposes and have distinct characteristics. Here are the primary differences between the two:

1. Definition:

   • International Treaties: These are formal agreements between two or more sovereign states or international entities that are legally binding under international law. Treaties can cover a wide range of subjects, such as trade, environmental protection, human rights, and military alliances.
   • International Organizations: These are entities established by treaties or agreements between states, designed to coordinate efforts and facilitate cooperation on specific issues. Examples include the United Nations (UN), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

2. Nature of Creation:

   • International Treaties: Created through negotiations and ratification by states. States may enter into treaties unilaterally (e.g., through a peace agreement) or multilaterally (e.g., through a global convention).
   • International Organizations: Formed when states come together to establish a structural framework for cooperation, usually through a founding treaty or charter that outlines the organization's purpose, governance, and functions.

3. Function:

   • International Treaties: Serve as legal instruments that establish obligations, rights, and rules for the parties involved. They can be specific to certain issues and may involve trade-offs between signatories.
   • International Organizations: Serve as platforms for dialogue, negotiation, and cooperation among member states. They can facilitate treaty negotiations, provide technical assistance, monitor compliance, and promote international norms and standards.

4. Duration and Stability:

   • International Treaties: Can be temporary or permanent, depending on the terms established within the treaty itself. They can also be amended or terminated following agreed-upon procedures.
   • International Organizations: Typically have a longer-term existence and operate based on ongoing collaboration among member states. They are designed to adapt and evolve over time as global challenges change.

5. Membership:

   • International Treaties: Are open to states (and sometimes international organizations) participating as parties. Membership depends on the terms of the treaty, and not all countries may join.
   • International Organizations: Have established criteria for membership, and states must formally apply to join. Membership often comes with specific rights and responsibilities.

6. Examples:

   • International Treaties: The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the Paris Agreement on climate change, and the Geneva Conventions.
   • International Organizations: The United Nations (UN), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the African Union (AU).

In summary, international treaties are specific legal agreements that create binding obligations, while international organizations are collective entities formed by states to promote cooperation and manage global issues.

Answer 2

Does this answer anything?

Answer 3

Yes, the response provided a detailed comparison of international treaties and international organizations, highlighting the key differences between them. To summarize the main points more succinctly:

1. Definition:

   • Treaties: Legally binding agreements between states.
   • Organizations: Entities created by treaties for cooperation among states.

2. Creation:

   • Treaties: Formed through negotiation and ratification.
   • Organizations: Established via founding treaties or charters.

3. Function:

   • Treaties: Establish rights and obligations on specific issues.
   • Organizations: Facilitate dialogue, cooperation, and coordination.

4. Duration:

   • Treaties: Can be temporary or permanent.
   • Organizations: Generally have a long-term existence.

5. Membership:

   • Treaties: Open to parties based on treaty terms.
   • Organizations: Membership requires formal application and adherence to criteria.

6. Examples:

   • Treaties: NPT, Paris Agreement.
   • Organizations: UN, IMF.

If you have any specific follow-up questions or need further clarification on any aspect, please feel free to ask!

Answer 4

Does this answer anything?

Rights treaties may serve as fundamental building blocks to practices of family engagement (Connolly, 2009). Shared attitudes and beliefs of practitioners will shape whether and how international human rights treaties become part of child welfare decision-making practices.As Connolly (2009) notes,“It is often the professional who provides the statutory context within which” families decide to engage in child welfare decision-making (p. 317). “Law,” including rights, can influence opinions and practices of those engaged in child welfare decision-making (pp. 315–316).Indeed, law can be broadly understood as part of culture, and legal practice as cultural practice (Mezey, 2001; Sarat & Kearns, 1998; Sarat & Simon, 2003).

Rights can influence how people think about family engagement. Rights may be used to prevent participants from trying to sabotage Child Welfare Vol. 90, No. 4 160 family engagement practices (Connolly & Ward, 2008a, p. 171). For instance, rights are useful for making a claim. Young people and their families can claim a right to expression to shape child welfare decision-making. International human rights treaties may highlight aspects of relationships among family members, as well as what participants can expect from child welfare decision-making. Engaging rights in specific instances of child welfare decision-making may lead to awareness of the possibilities of family engagement for other individuals.In this way, practitioners may change people’s conceptions of and use of rights for child welfare decision-making.

Answer 5

Yes, the passage you've provided addresses the role of rights treaties in shaping family engagement within child welfare decision-making. Here are the key points and insights from the text:

1. Foundational Role of Rights Treaties: The passage suggests that international rights treaties are critical in informing and shaping practices related to family engagement in child welfare.

2. Influence of Practitioners: It highlights the importance of practitioners' attitudes and beliefs, indicating that their perspectives will affect how these human rights treaties are integrated into child welfare practices.

3. Legal and Cultural Context: The text posits that the law is intertwined with culture, suggesting that legal frameworks are not only rules to follow but also cultural practices that shape societal norms and interactions, including those in the context of child welfare.

4. Rights as a Tool for Empowerment: Rights are framed as a means for families, particularly young people, to assert their claims and actively participate in decision-making processes related to child welfare. The emphasis is on how rights can facilitate engagement and influence outcomes.

5. Awareness and Change: The passage suggests that engaging with rights in child welfare settings can enhance awareness of familial relationships and expectations, potentially leading practitioners and families to rethink and redefine their understanding and application of rights in decision-making.

Overall, the passage effectively articulates the impact of international human rights treaties on child welfare practices, emphasizing both the challenges and opportunities they present for family engagement. If you have specific questions about this content or need further elaboration on certain points, please let me know!