The article, Western International Law and China’s Confucianism in the 19th Century is about the integration of international law in China. Author, Zewei’s thesis in this article is that western powers clashed with China’s Confucian ways and brought about their implementation of international law (2011, 286). The article makes claim that by the middle of the 19th century the threat of western powers was one of the main factors that drove the Qing dynasty to adopt modernized international law, which they had avoided for the most part in the past due to their belief that foreign relations could be a danger to their dynastic empire (Zewei 2011, 279-299). Zewei concludes in this article that events such as the Opium war lead up to China to accepting international law into their political culture and that this would eventually lead to China’s modernization (2011, 306).
Steinberg’s article primarily focuses on NGOs’ one-sided campaign against Israel. The article demonstrates this idea through numerous examples, such as the way NGOs like HRW openly condemn Israel for military actions against Palestine and chose to ignore the fact that many of these actions were done so directly in defense against the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas (Steinberg 2011, 38). The article discusses how NGOs are effective at influencing major political forces, such as the UN, through their use of “soft power,” in which they gain influence through appeal to concepts such as morality instead of using coercion (Steinberg 2011, 27). An example of using soft power to gain influence was through the Goldstone’s report, which was built up of information, that was often biased or false, from over 50 NGOs that was used to spark further condemnation against Israel by the international community (Steinberg 2011, 40).
Human rights and business have only been in the international spotlight for a very short while. According to the article, Human right, and Business, major discussions about this sprung up in the 1980s and only received legitimate attention in the 1990s (Wesley, Arnold and Muchlinski 2012, 1). The reason there was such a delay in this becoming an issue was the mindset that protecting human rights was only considered an indirect responsibility of businesses, with the primary responsibility being expected of governments (Wesley, Arnold and Muchlinski 2012, 1). As business became more of a globalized endeavor, it became apparent that governments were not entirely capable or willing to fulfill their responsibility to protect human rights and thus international frameworks are necessary to define the requirements responsibilities for businesses to do so (Wesley, Arnold and Muchlinski 2012, 2-5).