ABSTRACT
One of the great paradoxes of the progress of human rights thinking is that many prominent governments that adopt human rights treaties or bills of rights, basically believe that human rights are only relevant for other countries. Human rights are treated as above all as an instrument of foreign policy. This is evidently the case for the United Kingdom, where the Foreign Office is responsible for monitoring compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It is particularly the case in the United States, which often likes to lead an international crusade on behalf of human rights while taking grave offense at any suggestion that some of its domestic practices raise human rights concerns. If the issue of human rights is fearured in American political discourse, it is as a stick with which to beat other states that have fallen foul of the State Department or are regarded as adversaries that threaten U.S. strategic interests.
