Between Normative Power and Civilizational Racism: The Human Rights Discourse behind the European Union''s Weapons Embargo against China

• Main Authors: Marius Gottschlich, 郭子易
• Other Authors: Chih-Yu Shih
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2013
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/02706583562583165678

碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 政治學研究所 === 101 === In today’s globalized world, the European Union (EU) is widely viewed both as economic force as well as political soft power which is able to set norms of acceptable behavior in international politics. Together with the USA, Europe is a common norm exporter that has been able to set model examples in different areas, most prominently in the area of human rights. Along with the UN and certain human rights organizations, the EU condemns human rights violations and sanctions states which are repeatedly in breach of universal human rights conventions. One of the most well-known examples is the EU’s weapons embargo against China in reaction to the Tiananmen incident in 1989, which was the starting point of an ongoing human rights dialogue between East and West that lasts until this day. Yet, as differences in their respective human rights conceptions begin to crystallize, China and the Union seem ever less inclined to further discuss the matter, most likely out of fear for the bilateral trade relations. Nevertheless, the Western criticism has not ended, after all the weapons embargo still stands as a symbol for the European demand of a responsible Chinese human rights policy. Yet, at the same time Europe faces its own troubles both in respect to the economic crisis as well as social rights and democracy within the EU. In a way, Europe faces its own human rights crisis today, a fact that not only influences domestic politics, but that could jeopardize the Union’s reputation as role model and normative power in international politics. Contemporary problems illustrate, the EU is far from being a unified political actor that is able to solve European problems in an orderly fashion. Far more it is still a conglomerate of 28 nation states whose “Common Foreign and Security Policy” as well as common economic policy fails in the face of individual national interests of the mightiest member states.