It is no exaggeration to say that the humanitarian provisions of the Helsinki Accord have been recorded in the history of international relations by virtue of not so much their content as the strong public response they have elicited. This reaction is perhaps surprising, for the humanitarian provisions of the Helsinki Accord itself are very weak. If the convergence of East and West means loss by the West of its legal perspective on issues as fundamental as human rights, then I would not recommend such a convergence. Keeping in mind the development of such problems in the future, it would be wise to criticize the content of the Helsinki Accord. Following some brief remarks on the Soviet Helsinki movement, I will criticize the Helsinki Accord in the hope that this criticism will help those who sign future agreements with the Soviet Union to be more attentive.
The Humanitarian Provisions of the Helsinki Accord: A Critique of their Significance,
13 Vanderbilt Law Review
Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vjtl/vol13/iss2/12