Two different prompts, both must be done
( no need in text citations )
The two Prompts
1. Debates have long been waged over the universal validity of moral judgments and, ultimately, of human rights. Charges of cultural imperialism have frequently been advanced, providing the basis for arguments in support of cultural relativism, arguments that come with their own set of conceptual and ethical issues. Moreover, international human rights law fails to settle the relativist-universalist debate. First, outline the basic claims of the relativist-universalist debate. Second, drawing on the readings and lectures, identify and briefly explain the relevant considerations that should be made if cultural differences are to be respected while human dignity is maintained. In doing so, make sure to note if there are certain practices that might be considered inappropriate in all circumstances.
2. Throughout the course, we have identified the failures and shortcomings of the international human rights framework in uniformly enforcing violations to human rights and dignity around the world. For the first part of this question, draw on the case of the genocide in Rwanda to identify and discuss three reasons for the failures of international law. In addition to explaining concretely how international law failed, go beyond the specific policy choices to explain the broader theoretical reasons for this failure. Second, given the renewal of international commitments in the early 2000s to halt the worst humanitarian crises through the notion of Responsibility to Protect (R2P), explain what might be done to strengthen international law to prevent these cases of abuse. In responding to both components of the question, you should draw on material from the readings and lecture. Specifically, your perspective on the issue should be informed by ideas and debates discussed in the readings, whether you agree or disagree with the propositions. If you disagree, explain why â€“ and how â€“ things might be understood differently.