Understanding the EU's response to LGBTI rights violations
In a news article in Politics and Governance, Johanne Døhlie Saltnes and Martijn Mos find that looking at social sanctions alongside material ones more accurately describes the choices policymakers face when designing their response to human rights violations.
This article aims to enrich the literature on EU sanctions in two ways. First, it argues that the absence of material sanctions does not imply a non‐response. When faced with human rights violations, policymakers enjoy a third option besides exerting material pressure or refraining from intervening. They may instead employ what constructivist scholars call social sanctions. This option consists of verbally calling out the violators, either publicly, through a naming‐and‐shaming strategy, or diplomatically via political dialogue and demarches. Social sanctions can be a credible alternative or complement to material sanctions. Second, we argue for the importance of disaggregating the EU as a sender of sanctions. A non‐response by executive institutions does not mean that the EU as a whole is standing idly by. Looking at social sanctions alongside material ones more accurately describes the choices policymakers face when designing their response to human rights violations. We demonstrate the value of our arguments by examining the EU’s various responses to LGBTI rights violations in Lithuania and Uganda.
Johanne Døhlie Saltnes and Martijn Mos
Understanding the EU's Response to LGBTI Rights Violations: Inter-Institutional Differences and Social Sanctions
Politics and Governance, 2022, 10(1), pp. 79-89.