Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8bljj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-02T11:34:13.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Looking beyond Ratification: Autocrats’ International Engagement with Women’s Rights

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 March 2023

Audrey L. Comstock Open the ORCID record for Audrey L. Comstock [Opens in a new window]  and
Andrea Vilán
Audrey L. Comstock*
Affiliation:
Arizona State University, USA
Andrea Vilán
Affiliation:
American University, USA
*
*Corresponding author. Email: audrey.comstock@asu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Although authoritarian regimes often repress the rights of women, many autocrats have committed to international treaties protecting women’s human rights. Scholars have typically overlooked this engagement, focusing instead on autocrats’ commitment (and violation) of treaties protecting civil, political, and physical integrity rights. Yet existing explanations for autocrats’ ratification of these treaties—such as appeasing domestic opposition groups—do not necessarily apply to women’s rights (von Stein 2013). As authoritarian international law is increasingly viewed as an important area of study (Ginsburg 2020), scholars should explore how authoritarian regimes navigate participation regarding women’s rights issues, including their engagement with the main women’s rights treaty, the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). After taking a closer look at how autocracies shape, commit, and challenge women’s rights internationally, we suggest several research directions to build this area of study.

Type
Critical Perspectives Article
Information
Politics & Gender , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , March 2024 , pp. 223 - 228
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Women, Gender, and Politics Research Section of the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baldez, Lisa, 2014. Defying Convention: US Resistance to the UN Treaty on Women’s Rights. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bjarnegård, Elin, and Donno, Daniela. 2023. “Window-Dressing or Window of Opportunity? Assessing the Advancement of Gender Equality in Autocracies.” Politics & Gender, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X22000496.Google Scholar
Cho, Seo‐Young. 2013. “International Women’s Convention, Democracy, and Gender Equality.” Social Science Quarterly 95 (3): 719–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comstock, Audrey L. 2021. Committed to Rights: UN Human Rights Treaties and Legal Paths for Commitment and Compliance. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comstock, Audrey L. 2022. “Negotiated Rights: UN Treaty Negotiation, Socialization, and Human Rights.” Journal of Human Rights 21 (4): 463–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creamer, Cosette D., and Simmons, Beth A.. 2020. “The Proof Is in the Process: Self-Reporting under International Human Rights Treaties.” American Journal of International Law 114 (1): 1–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donno, Daniela, Fox, Sara, and Kaasik, Joshua. 2021. “International Incentives for Women’s Rights in Dictatorships.” Comparative Political Studies 55 (3): 451–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginsburg, Tom. 2020. “Authoritarian International Law?” American Journal of International Law 114 (2): 221–60.Google Scholar
Hunt, Kate, and Gruszczynski, Mike. 2019. “The Ratification of CEDAW and the Liberalization of Abortion Laws.” Politics & Gender 15 (4): 722–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kang, Alice J. 2015. Bargaining for Women’s Rights: Activism in an Aspiring Muslim Democracy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keck, Margaret E., and Sikkink, Kathryn. 1998. Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Kuhar, Roman, and Paternotte, David, eds. 2017. Anti-gender Campaigns in Europe: Mobilizing against Equality. London: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Marshall, Monty G., and Gurr, Ted R.. 2020. “Polity5: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800–2018.” Data set user’s manual, Center for Systemic Peace.Google Scholar
McKibben, Heather Elko, and Western, Shaina D.. 2020. “Reserved Ratification: An Analysis of States’ Entry of Reservations upon Ratification of Human Rights Treaties.” British Journal of Political Science 51 (2): 687–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle. 2006. Human Rights and Gender Violence: Translating International Law into Local Justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Noh, Yuree. 2023. “Public Opinion and Women’s Rights in Autocracies.” Politics & Gender, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X22000514.Google Scholar
Simmons, Beth A. 2009. Mobilizing for Human Rights: International Law in Domestic Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Terman, Rochelle L., and Byun, Joshua. 2021. “Punishment and Politicization in the International Human Rights Regime.” American Political Science Review 116 (2): 1–18.Google Scholar
Vilán, Andrea. 2018. “The Domestic Incorporation of Human Rights Treaties.” PhD diss., University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
von Stein, Jana. 2013. “The Autocratic Politics of International Human Rights Agreement Ratification.” http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2108891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vreeland, James. 2008. “Political Institutions and Human Rights: Why Dictatorships Enter into the United Nations Convention Against Torture.” International Organization 62 (1): 65–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zvogbo, Kelebogile, Sandholtz, Wayne, and Mulesky, Suzie. 2020. “Reserving Rights: Explaining Human Rights Treaty Reservations.” International Studies Quarterly 64 (4): 785–97.Google Scholar