Human rights discourse and practice as crisis management: insights from the Algerian case

Abstract

In recent years, academic work in the field of International Relations has tended to concentrate on the impact of norms and ideas on the changing behaviour of states. Constructivism has evolved as the main challenger to rationalist theories. Constructivists emphasize that state behaviour is not primarily determined by economic or military conditions but by internationally held norms and ideas, such as human rights. According to this approach, changing state behaviour with regard to human rights is determined by transnational human rights networks, which exert moral pressure on states which violate human rights so that they comply with international standards. This paper challenges these theoretical assumptions with regard to the reality of human rights in Algeria between 1962 and 2001. The empirical analysis of the Algerian case demonstrates that Algeria has not been vulnerable to moral pressure from a transnational human rights network. The various changes in the human rights record of Algeria during the period examined can best be explained by existing rationalist approaches which concentrate on socio‐economic and political interests. This paper proposes an alternative explanation regarding changing state behaviour in the field of human rights. In the Algerian case, these changes should be seen as a means of the ruling elite to secure and maintain its power.