In recent years international human rights have become a rallying cry for industrialized nations in their dealings with less-advantaged countries. Not-coincidentally, nationalism has once again risen to the forefront in many sub-industrialized countries. This relationship has become a self-fulfilling prophecy: the more developed nations (and specifically the US) attempt to inflict their morals on the rest of the world, the more other nations will turn to nationalism to salvage some kind of identity. This is magnified rather than abated by the global economy, has swept over other cultures in a plague of McDonalds and Blockbusters. The dangers inherent in these issues can clearly be seen in the conflict between Serbia and Kosovo, and the international community's involvement in the war.
Before we begin with our review of the Kosovo conflict, we must reflect for a moment on the conflict between Nationalism and Human Rights law. As Elizabeth Kiss eloquently states, "Nationalism is a form of political consciousness which revolves around identification with and allegiance to a nation, [which] is a group whose members believe themselves to have a shared culture and history and in fact generally shareàlanguage, ethnicity, [and] race" (1). Kiss goes on to note that a main problem in our historical understanding of Nationalism has been the confusion between a nation and a state: in many instances, such as Eastern Europe, states are actually a melange of different nationalities and cultures (1). Nationalism has been seen as a unifying force for a country. But the problem with this conception is that countries are more amalgamations of people than unions, in the sense that they house many different minorities rather than being a union of like individuals.
In direct contrast to these ideas, Human rights as we conceive of them today came into being on December 10, 1948 when the United Nations passed the Universal Declaration of Hum...