Globalising liberalism or multiculturalism? The Durban agenda and the role of local human rights education in the implementation of global norms

Abstract

This article critically evaluates recent attempts to globalise norms on improving policy responses to the increasing existence of multicultural societies by the United Nations conference widely referred to as the Durban agenda. The article, first, sets out the context for and the content of the Durban agenda. It then discusses whether a liberal model of minority rights based on a principle of toleration should be the basis for global norms or whether a model of multiculturalism based on the idea of recognition should form the starting‐point. After reflecting on the drawbacks of either model, a defence of a balance between liberal minority rights and multicultural group rights is developed. The argument acknowledges the need to reform individualist liberalism, while warning of the dangers of human rights violations condoned in the extreme versions of the multicultural model. The process of globalising norms governing multiculturalism risks failure if implemented top‐down only. The second question is therefore what the role should be for local human rights organisations in implementing these global norms. The article shows the high importance of local human rights education by reference to a recent project in post‐communist Europe. The assessment of current campaigns in Bosnia‐Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia‐Montenegro and Bulgaria shows that neither the implementation of the Durban agenda nor the protection of minority rights emphasised in the process of enlargement of the European Union can create sustainable change without engaging with teachers, community leaders and young people in non‐formal education. Moreover, these examples also illustrate the importance of a sensitive balance between liberalism and multiculturalism, strengthening the argument that global norms ought to include both concerns.

Keywords:

• multiculturalism
• Durban agenda
• human rights education
• ethnic discrimination
• post‐communist Europe

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to all local partners and the management board on the RIME project for their input and to the European Initiative on Democracy and Human Rights for supporting the project financially. I also wish to thank colleagues at the School of Politics, University of the West of England, for supporting my involvement in the final phase of the project. Finally, thanks to the referees of this article for their swift and useful suggestions.

Notes

1. For a similar argument on the use of globalisation as justification for cosmopolitanism see van den Anker, in Shaw (1999).

2. I am grateful to one of the referees for this point.

3. Oonagh Reitman (2005). For a very good enunciation of issues involved in external and internal protection of minority cultures in relation to Indian Muslim women see Das (1994).

4. Some of the theoretical issues associated with migration, minority rights and the resultant impact on citizenship within the European context are very well articulated in the issue of PS: Political Science and Politics, 38(4), October (2005).

5. To obtain a copy of these training materials please contact the author at: Christien.Vandenaker @uwe.ac.uk

6. See: http://www.warwick.ac.uk/sociology/RIME