Rwanda Case Study

NGOs and TANs are organizations that pay a significant role in informing both the public and government about the situation happening elsewhere in the world that require attention. In addition, these organizations also act to report the compliance of principle of human rights in the world. In the case of Rwanda, the NGOs, such as the Human Rights Watch and Red Cross, repeatedly used inside sources on the ground of Rwanda to report about the various events in the April and May of 1994. As supporters of humanitarian intervention in Rwanda, both the Red Cross and Human Rights Watch hosted two press conferences together in order to inform the public about the best course of actions in order to stop the human rights violations. With the inside sources

Domestic politics played a role in influencing foreign policies of certain countries, depending on the majority support or divided views of its citizens. The national interests reflect how the officials in the government would respond to international crisis, such as the Rwandan genocide in 1994. In the Rwanda game, the roles of public opinion in the permanent members of the UNSC were significant as each public opinion representatives stand to convince their own government to pursue a course of actions in Rwanda. The representatives from Russia and United Kingdom were able to successfully to convince their government to vote on proposal in consideration with what their citizens wanted, as both roles were met with no opposing views in competition to persuade their government. United Kingdom was a strong advocate in voting against intervention and for decrease in troop size, yet by the power of the public, the ambassador had to vote against a proposal to withdraw all troops during the fourth Security Council session

All nations in the world, beside North Korea, seem to agree in the importance of protecting these human rights, as each government set up law in order to protect their citizens. Yet, the protection of human rights outside their borders is rarely present in the world, and even if a humanitarian intervention was called, the movement failed to protect the rights of the people. Countries often neglect the human rights violations, in spite of their belief of rights for all people, in order to put their own government interests first. Though public opinion, NGOs and TANs act to influence the stance of the government, sometime they failed to get momentum to back up their views, causing the advocacy of intervention or nonintervention to fail. The importance of human rights for all is agreed upon by all nations, but countries often failed to protect these human rights abuses outside of their borders, as they lack resources and funds, along with the inconsistency toward their own