To answer the question posed in the title it is useful to distinguish between human rights as the set of rules and human rights as principles. It also distinguishes between human rights and the philosophy of human rights. In 1948, there existed a cross-cultural consensus on rights as principles and on basic tenets of the philosophy of human rights. Recently, the consensus over principles and over the philosophy of human rights has broken down. The events of September 11 did not start this process; it merely accelerated it, and the war on terrorism brought it to a point that could be beyond repair. Therefore, our task today should not be to restore the consensus over the philosophy of human rights, but to detach the rules from – once universal, albeit no more – principles so that we could rescue human rights norms and find the most adequate means to enforce them.

To understand better this thesis, a brief overview of the development of human rights is in order.

The Original Consensus on Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) adopted by the United Nations in December 1948 reflected a broad consensus between various ideas, values, and cultures. Even though the idea of individual rights was of Western origin, it was the non-Western countries that pushed for the adoption of the Declaration, against some reluctance of the Western governments (Lauren 1998: 165–71).