Search

A conference paper about religion and violence is presented which was prepared for presentation at the American Political Science Association's Annual Conference from August 30-September 2, 2012, in New Orleans, Louisiana. The paper discusses several topics including Muslim-Christian violence in Nigeria in August 2011, religious differences, and power-sharing.

When the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families in 1990, proponents heralded it as a major achievement and the most comprehensive set of protections for migrant workers and their families. By 2007, however, only 37 countries had ratified the Convention. Why have so few countries ratified the Convention and at a slower rate compared to other treaties opened for ratification around the same time? And why have certain countries ratified the treaty while others have not? This paper will examine the decision of states to ratify the Convention. The paper employs a Cox Proportional Hazard model to test the hypothesis that identification as a sending or receiving country of migrants - an issue specific variable - is a significant explanatory factor that explains the likelihood of commitment at a faster rate. The analysis reveals support for this rational choice hypothesis, as well as variables that take into account domestic political processes in accordance with a liberal theoretical understanding of treaty commitment. Factors such as the strength of democracy and states' respect for human rights are found to be significant. The paper argues that a synthesis of rational choice theory and liberal theory are necessary to understand the likelihood and rate of commitment. There is no support, however, for an ideational or normative theory of ratification in this case, which diverges from other scholars who examine commitment to international human rights treaties. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]