International human rights law often appears in the same form across nations but produces vastly different public responses.
Our survey experiments conducted in India, Israel, and Argentina reveal that violent actions by opposition groups significantly increase public support for government repression. The research design systematically varied both opposition tactics (violent vs non-violent) and government approaches while assessing reactions to legal frameworks.
Interestingly, the impact of international law differs dramatically across these diverse contexts:
* In India, knowledge of violated international law decreased approval of government actions
* Conversely, in Israel, being informed about violations increased public support for their government
These findings demonstrate that identical legal constraints don't uniformly influence political attitudes.
This nuanced research offers important insights into existing theories on repression and international law. It suggests these concepts must be understood within specific national contexts rather than universally applied, forcing scholars to reconsider their assumptions about public opinion formation.
| Violence, Non-violence, and the Effects of International Human Rights Law was authored by Yonatan Lupu and Geoffrey P.R. Wallace. It was published by Wiley in AJPS in 2019. |
