The Roldós Doctrine’s Contributions to International Relations: Tensions Between State Sovereignty and Non-Intervention Versus Human Rights

Main Article Content

Abstract

This article addresses the normative tension between the principles of state sovereignty and non-intervention, on the one hand, and the defense of human rights, on the other, from a historical, international and regional perspective. Using the historical-critical method, three key periods of these tensions were analyzed: the Cold War, the military dictatorships of the 1970s and 1980s, as well as the post–Cold War era. The findings reveal that Latin America has contributed to the international debate on human rights and that the Roldós doctrine is a proposal for regional integration that places human rights defense as a universal principle. In conclusion, the Roldós doctrine represents a contribution to foreign policy, ignored by academic debates. Latin America is a scenario of theoretical contributions that, if considered, would challenge the Eurocentric narrative of international relations.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite

Carranco-Paredes, S., & García-Sanz, D. (2025). The Roldós Doctrine’s Contributions to International Relations: Tensions Between State Sovereignty and Non-Intervention Versus Human Rights. Estado & Comunes, 2(21), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.37228/estado_comunes.389

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Santiago Carranco-Paredes, Daniel García-Sanz

Author Biographies

Santiago Carranco-Paredes (Universidad Internacional del Ecuador)

Coordinator of the International Relations Laboratory (Irlab) and tenured research professor at the Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities

Daniel García-Sanz (Universidad Internacional del Ecuador)

Research professor at the Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities

References

1
Acharya, A. (2011). Foundations of Collective Action in Asia: Theory and Practice of Regional Cooperation. Routledge.
2
Acharya, A. (2014). The End of American World Order. Polity Press.
3
Acharya, A. (2016). Advancing Global IR: Challenges, Contentions, and Contributions. International Studies Review, 18(1), 4-15.
4
Acharya, A., & Buzan, B. (2019). The Making of Global International Relations: Origins and Evolution of IR at its Centenary. Cambridge University Press.
5
Bellamy, A., & Dunne, T. (Eds.). (2016). The Oxford Handbook of the Responsibility to Protect. Oxford University Press.
6
Bellamy, A., y McLoughlin, S. (2018). Rethinking Humanitarian Intervention. Palgrave Macmillan.
7
Berdugo, I. (2023). Las dictaduras militares de Argentina, Brasil, Chile y Uruguay y la justicia transicional. Revista Sistema Penal Crítico, 4, e31437.
8
Borja, R. (2011). Los movimientos sociales en los 80 y 90: la incidencia de las ONG, la Iglesia y la Izquierda. Observatorio de la Cooperación al Desarrollo en Ecuador y Centro de Investigaciones CIUDAD.
9
Bull, H. (1977). The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. Columbia University Press.
10
Bull, H. (2002). The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. Palgrave.
11
Bundegaard, C. (2010). The Normative Divide in International Society: Sovereignty versus Responsibility. DIIS Working Paper 2010: 27. Danish Institute for International Studies.
12
Buzan, B. (2004). From International to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation. Cambridge University Press.
13
Cueva, A. (2008). Posfacio. Los años ochenta: una crisis de alta intensidad (1977-1994). Entre la ira y la esperanza y otros ensayos de crítica latinoamericana. Siglo del Hombre y Clacso.
14
Donnelly, J. (2014). State Sovereignty and International Human Rights. Ethics & International Affairs, 28(2), 225-238.
15
Dunne, T. (2015). The Responsibility to Protect and World Order. En R. Thakur y W. Maley (eds.), Theorising the Responsibility to Protect (pp. 81-100). Cambridge University Press.
16
Dunne, T. (2021). The English School. En T. Dunne, M. Kurki y S. Smith (eds.), International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity (pp. 108-128). Oxford University Press.
17
Engstrom, P., & Hurrell, A. (2019). Human Rights Regimes in the Americas. United Nations Digital Library. https://digitallibrary.un.org
18
Fundación Juan Vives Suriá (comp.). (2010). Derechos humanos: Historia y conceptos básicos. Fundación Editorial El perro y la rana, Fundación Juan Vives Suriá, Defensoría del Pueblo. http://biblioteca.clacso.edu.ar/Venezuela/fundavives/20170102055815/pdf_132.pdf
19
Glanville, L. (2016). Sovereignty. En A. Bellamy y T. Dunne (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Responsibility to Protect (pp. 151-166). Oxford University Press.
20
Hobson, J. M. (2012). The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics: Western International Theory, 1760–2010. Cambridge University Press.
21
Lechini, G. (2009). La cooperación Sur-Sur y la búsqueda de autonomía en América Latina ¿Mito o realidad? Relaciones Internacionales, (11), 55-81.
22
Long, T. (2018). Latin America and the Liberal International Order: An Agenda for Research. International Studies Review, 20(3), 423-446.
23
Montúfar, C. (2023). La transformación del Estado ecuatoriano 1960-2020. Adaptación de Estado gubernativo de seguridad nacional 1979-1997. Informe de investigación de la Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar. https://bit.ly/42qXnfJ
24
O’ Donnell, G. (1996). El Estado Burocrático Autoritario. Editorial Belgrano.
25
Philpott, D. (2001). Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas Shaped Modern International Relations. Princeton University Press.
26
Quirk, J. (2008). Historical Methods. En C. Reus-Smit y D. Snidal, (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Relations. Oxford University Press.
27
Roldós, M. (2012). La Carta de Conducta. Universidad de Guayaquil.
28
Serrano, M. (2010). The Human Rights Regime in the Americas: Theory and Reality. En M. Serrano y V. Popovski (eds.), Human Rights in the Americas (pp. 1-21). United Nations University Press.
29
Serrano, M. (2016). Latin America. En A. Bellamy y T. Dunne (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Responsibility to Protect (pp. 429-450). Oxford University Press.
30
Sikkink, K. (1997). Reconceptualizing Sovereignty in the Americas: Historical Precursors and Current Practices. El papel del derecho internacional en América. La soberanía nacional en la era de la integración regional (pp. 101-119). México: UNAM.
31
Sikkink, K. (2014). Latin America and the Origins of International Human Rights. Harvard Kennedy School.
32
Schulz, C.-A., & Long, T. (2021). The Liberal International Order and Latin America: Global and Regional Dimensions. International Affairs, 97(6), 1795-1813.
33
Thakur, R., & Maley, W. (Eds.). (2015). Theorising the Responsibility to Protect. Cambridge University Press.
34
Valencia, J. (s/f). La agenda del Ecuador. Relaciones Ecuador-Estados Unidos: situación actual y perspectivas (pp. 39-57). Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores.
35
Vargas, J. (2013). Luces y sombras del origen de la ONU y la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos. El Cotidiano, (180), 31-40. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=32528338003
36
Ventura, M. E. (2014). El Sistema Interamericano de Protección de los Derechos Humanos. Revista do Instituto Brasileiro de Direitos Humanos, 14(14), 263-285. https://www.corteidh.or.cr/tablas/r34041.pdf
37
Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Addison-Wesley.
38
Wheeler, N. J. (1992). Pluralist or Solidarist Conceptions of International Society: Bull and Vincent on Humanitarian Intervention. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 21(3), 463-487.
39
Wheeler, N. J. (2000). Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society. Oxford University Press.
40
Documentos normativos y prensa
41
Carta de Conducta de Riobamba (1980). Declaración suscrita por los presidentes del Pacto Andino en Riobamba. Presidencia de la República del Ecuador.
42
Naciones Unidas (1945). Carta de las Naciones Unidas. Naciones Unidas. https://www.un.org/es/about-us/un-charter
43
Naciones Unidas (1948). Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos. Naciones Unidas. https://www.un.org/es/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
44
Naciones Unidas (1965). Declaración sobre la inadmisibilidad de la intervención en los asuntos internos de los Estados y la protección de su independencia y soberanía. Naciones Unidas. https://bit.ly/4lwy7h3