10 Abstract This is the first empirical study to evaluate, in combination, the relative impact of the US’s four major foreign policy tools (i.e., military intervention, military assistance, economic sanctions, and economic assistance) on human rights conditions abroad. This study presents a Hegemonic Intervention Hypothesis, which cautions against 15 US action to promote human rights, and a Coercion Hypothesis, which assesses punitive actions as likely to be more harmful than acts of assistance. Relying on a dataset of 144 countries for the years 1975–2005, this study finds that, contrary to Washington’s stated desire to promote human rights, all forms of US foreign policy intervention are either neutral in effect or linked to increases in the level of state 20 repression.

中文翻译：

---

美国外交政策工具在改善人权状况方面是否有效？

10 摘要 这是第一项综合评估美国四大外交政策工具（即军事干预、军事援助、经济制裁和经济援助）对国外人权状况的相对影响的实证研究。本研究提出了霸权干预假说，该假说告诫美国不要采取 15 促进人权的行动，以及强制假说，该假说评估惩罚性行动可能比援助行为更有害。本研究依靠 1975 年至 2005 年 144 个国家的数据集发现，与华盛顿所宣称的促进人权的愿望相反，美国所有形式的外交政策干预要么实际上是中性的，要么与国家水平的提高有关。 20镇压。