Strength, Effectiveness and Legitimacy of Transnational Arrangements on Women’s Rights: The Case of ‘European’ Hungary

 Transnational Politics

Strength, Effectiveness and Legitimacy of Transnational Arrangements on Women’s Rights: The Case of ‘European’ Hungary

 

I. Introduction

Although, we have seen a significant rise in the inclusion of women’s rights in transnational arrangements since the first ‘wave’ of feminism (women’s suffrage), yet, sovereign states remain resistant to adaptation (Forde, 2018; Al Hussein in Roggeband, 2019; Roggeband, 2020a).

This paper will analyse the extent to which global arrangements of women’s rights are powerful, effective and legitimate. Our case study will be one of the most well-known examples of anti-women’s rights in today’s Europe: Hungary (Roggeband, 2020b). Through this exemplification, we will see how although, the transnational governance of women’s rights is effective and powerful in raising awareness on gender-based differences, but remain weak against religious and pro-family views, in particular, when the representative party of these values is in a majority-government (Nemzeti Választási Iroda, n.d). This critical analysis will involve the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) – to analyse transnational arrangements power and effectiveness – and a postcolonial critique – on the legitimacy of such conventions. The example of Hungary will lead us to a not-so-promising conclusion on the effectiveness and legitimacy of women’s right, yet, it provides room for future research.

 

II. The Strength and Effectiveness of Transnational Governance on Women’s Rights

The most important effect of transnational gender- and women’s rights governance can be found in research. Feminist scholars enabled us to see the ‘unseen’ masculinities in global politics, where men dominate decision-making (as we rarely see a few women around the table). Also, such critical analysis uncovers the different experience of women when it comes to war, sexual abuse, rape, and social exclusions in education, work or access to public goods (such as, abortion) (Enloe, 1990; Hall, 2018).  Feminist researches, therefore, have and still contribute to the constant broadening of women’s inclusion in international arrangements. They broaden our understanding of transnational politics and highlight what the global ‘governors’ otherwise would miss, for example, the transatlantic antislavery movement and the International Arms Trade Treaty’s development (Enloe, 1990).

Second, the strength and effectiveness of women’s rights transnational governance through the example of Hungary can be seen in the signing of CEDAW, compared with reality (Vida, 2019). Hungary also allows abortion since 1953 and there is an increasing support for single-mothers (Center for Reproductive Rights, n.d.) Therefore, transnational arrangements are indeed effective in pushing for recognition.

 

Yet, the supremacy of religious and pro-family values tends to win against the rights of women in Hungary. Transnationally, the country has joined the increasingly organised anti-women’s right movement, that has been started by the Vatican in 1994 (Roggeband, 2020b). Transnational arrangements of women’s rights remain to be ‘guides’ that even signatory states are not enforced to comply with. In the case of abortion, under the label of ‘right to life’ women’s right to abort is often undermined (Roggeband, 2019). Therefore, transnational governance of women’s rights – apart from effectively increasing the awareness of policy-makes’ on gender-based differences and the unique experience of women – remains weak and ineffective. 

 

III. The Questionable Legitimacy of Transnational Governance on Women’s Rights

In the case of Hungary, women’s rights are mostly undermined by the far-right Fidesz government based on their ‘foreign, Western enforced nature’, going against national conservative values of family-structure and gender-roles (where a family means a male father and a female mother with children, and a mother’s duty remains mostly in the household) (Vida, 2019). To understand this, a postcolonial lens might be useful. Postcolonialists – similarly to the far-right government of Hungary – argue that transnational governance of Human Rights, including that of women, are merely the enforcement of Western norms on other non-Western cultures and nations (Brown, 2014). In Hungary’s case, indeed we have information about the long-embedded history of women’s subordinate role (Száray, n.d.a, n.d.b). Therefore, the legitimacy of transnationally arranged human/women’s rights remain questionable, as foreign undermining objects.

Our case study, Hungary is not unique. We see similar trends in other countries such as Bulgaria, Croatia and Poland (Roggeband, 2020b).

 

IV. Conclusion and Looking Forward

This study has analysed the extent to which transnational arrangements on women’s rights (particularly in the case of Hungary) are effective and legitimate. Although, we have seen that feminist research and transnational arrangements are powerfully broadening women’s rights inclusion in transnational agreements, these documents, actions and institutions remain optional guides rather than enforceable laws.

 Hungary has signed CEDAW and has legalised abortion, alongside the support of single parents (Center for Reproductive Rights, n.d.).Yet, the rights of women are undermined by religious and pro-family norms, that can be argued – through a postcolonial lens – as the indigenous values, that the global, ‘Western’ policy-making tries to subordinate (Brown, 2014). 

After this discovery of CEDAW’s, and transnational governance’s weakness on women’s rights in Hungary, there is room for future research to find ways for strengthening the international system of women’s rights.

 

Bibliography

 

Brown, O. (2014) ‘Rights from the Other Side of the Line: Postcolonial perspectives on human rights’ Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science (25) Politikon: The IAPSS Journal of Political Science [online] pp. 5-26 Available at: https://doi.org/10.22151/politikon.25.1 (accessed on 20/10/2020)

Center for Reproductive Rights (n.d.) Hungary's Abortion Provisions Center for Reproductive Rights [online] Available at: https://www.reproductiverights.org/world-abortion-laws/hungarys-abortion-provisions (accessed on 20/10/2020)

Enloe, C. (1990) ‘Gender Makes the World Go Round: Where Are the Women?’ in Enloe, C. (ed.) Bananas, Beaches and Bases JSTOR [online] pp. 1-36 Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/j.ctt6wqbn6 (accessed on 20/10/2020)

Forde, S. (2018) Human Rights and Wrongs in a Globalised World lecture University of York 29/10/2018

Hall, A. (2018) Critical Global Security Studies lecture University of York 01/11/2018

Htun, M. and Weldon, S. L. (2010) ‘When Do Governments Promote Women’s Rights? A Framework for the Comparative Analysis of Sex Equality Policy’ Perspectives on Politics Cambridge University Press 8(1) Cambridge Core [online] pp. 207–21 Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592709992787 (accessed on 18/10/2020)

Nemzeti Választási Iroda (n.d.) ‘Országgyűlési Választások [Parliamentary Elections]’ Nemzeti Vákasztási Iroda – Nyilvántartások [online] Available at: https://valtor.valasztas.hu/valtort/jsp/tmd1.jsp?TIP=2 (accessed on 20/10/2020)

Roggeband, C. (2019) ‘International women’s rights: Progress under attack?’ KFG Working Paper Series (26) SSRN[online] Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3316700 (accessed on 19/10/2020)

Roggeband, C. (2020a) Transnational Politics Course Guide Canvas [online] p. 12 Available at: https://canvas.uva.nl/courses/18856/files/3320532?module_item_id=696543 (accessed on 20/10/2020)

Roggeband, C. (2020b) Transnational Politics lecture University of Amsterdam 05/10/2020

Száray, M. (n.d.a) Történelem 10. [History 10] Budapest: Oktatási Hivatal

Száray, M. (n.d.b) Történelem 11. [History 11] Budapest: Oktatási Hivatal

Vida, B. (2019) ‘New waves of anti-sexual and reproductive health and rights strategies in the European Union: the anti-gender discourse in Hungary’ Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters 27(2) Taylor & Francis [online] pp. 13-16 Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/26410397.2019.1610281 (accessed on 20/10/2020)