As mentioned above, one of the sub-questions asks about the relation between rights-based approach and nation-building. And from what I have found in the interviews, implementing rights-based approach in the civil society contributes towards nation-building:
Integration of rights-based approach, and building the civil society organizations’ capacities, can lead to that they are strong enough to play a bigger role in building a state (Daghash, interviewee).
One of the arguments against rights-based approach is that a high focus on rights produces unnecessary legal conflict, and that it is hard to distinguish which right has priority over another (Haas 2014, p. 516). So instead of a society based on human rights, the opponents against RBA want an approach that will lead to consensus and takes cultural, economic and political perspectives into account (Haas 2014, p. 516). But the very nature of human rights is to solve conflicts. So NCA and their partner-organizations internalization of human rights not only lead to legal conflicts, but it can also solve them (Haas 2014, p. 516). And this is another key for nation-building; rights-based approach is supposed to resolve conflict, which is important for a just and unified society. And as a paragraph below will show – cultural aspects are taken into consideration despite of internalizing rights-based approach in the society.
Humanitarian and development aid are about trying to gain better livelihood for the recipients (Fretheim 2012, p. 85). Using human rights-based approach as an asset to achieve this is an important entry point. Freedom is at its best when the people experience freedom of education, travel, health services, speech, democratic values, non-discrimination and non- violation. But the combination of rights and development is not an indisputable matter, especially because the focus on rights depends on an influential government approach (Fretheim 2012, p. 87). Taking responsibility for fulfilling these rights is perhaps the hardest struggle in the quest of a human rights-based approach. Especially because the somewhat fragile Palestinian government is at Israel’s mercy in terms of giving the Palestinian people its rights. Human rights are depending on determent governments that uphold these rights, not only normatively, but also descriptively.
Amartya Sen sees the freedom that derives from rights-based approach as essential for development (Sen 1999, p. 3). Sen’s view is that when giving people their freedom, they become able to participate in the society, which is essential for nation-building. He gives two reasons for why freedom is essential for development. The evaluative reason is much in line with the rights-based goals of the NCA – development is determined by the amount of freedom in the society. This implication has extended effects on the NCA’s human rights- work, and it means with freedom comes development. From what I have found in the interviews Israeli authorities restrict much of the daily-life for Palestinians living in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza (Barakat, interviewee). Increased freedom for Palestinians in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza would be a catalyst for development.
Nader Hanna from EAPPI stated that their EAs witnessed Israeli restrictions on Palestinians, if Israeli restrictions do not hinder Palestinian development, the very least it hinders the freedom for Palestinians.
The other reason why freedom is important for development is the effectiveness reason (Sen 1999, p. 4), which says that development depends on the free agency of the people. The findings indicate that the NCA and its partner-organizations are involved with rights-based approach. And much in line with Sen’s arguments, the NCA provides Palestinians the right to education and health, which is part of development towards a stable nation. However, freedom by itself does not promote development. There have to be means on the ground for development to occur. At the moment the NCA and its partner-organizations human rights- approach is not adequate for the free agency of people. For instance, Hanna from EAPPI said whenever human rights-violations do come about all they can do is report on it. They are not in the position to intervene. From this comes the deduction that the NCA and its partner- organizations have not adequately implemented rights-based approach in the Palestinian society, because they cannot intervene when human-rights-violations occur – only advocate against it.
Chapter 2.5 brought up concerns with the implementation of universal human rights in nation- building. A critique of the implementation of universal human rights comes from cultural relativism. Cultural relativism says that there are no universal moral applicable for all cultures (Bergem and Ekeløve-Slydal 2009, p. 194). However, the findings indicate that the NCA is not dictating human rights in the Palestinian society. According to the NCA’s Country Plan, their rights-based approach is rather concerned with empowering the rights-holders and challenging the duty-bearers (Norwegian Church Aid 2010, p. 10). Additionally, Nader Hanna from EAPPI stated that their rights-based approach is not a matter of influence Westernization, but of protecting Palestinians from human rights-violations:
Our whole mandate is based on international human rights law. It’s all based on; is this a violation on someone’s rights? If it is, then we act (Hanna, interviewee).
As chapter 2.5 identified, human rights are accused of being undemocratic, because they emphasize universal norms and values, and not those norms and values originating from
197). So that way, implementing rights-based approach to nation-building can in fact defeat its own end, because implementing human rights in the society can hinder democratic procedures. However, Barakat from the NCA claims that their approach to human rights is:
A matter of giving the Palestinian people a minimum standard of rights, we help with the right to health, protection and gender issues among other things (Barakat, interviewee).