Tuesday, December 18, 2007
All the warnings in mid-2006 that the newly formed U.N. Human Rights Council would be nothing more than cover for serial human rights abusers have come true.
As Miami Herald columnist Andres Oppen-heimer noted in his piece that appeared on this page Saturday, the panel is a joke.
But, it is no laughing matter when nations such as Angola, Cuba, North Korea, Sudan, Zimbabwe and others with a history of violating individual’s rights know that their behavior will be ignored by the council.
Indeed, its failure to take an aggressive stand against what has been taking place in Sudan, which is experiencing the worst human rights crisis in recent memory, clearly demonstrates the bias of a majority of the members.
Of the 47 seats, 26 are held by African and Asian regional groups which are dominated by Islamic states. Thus, the council’s unending criticism of Israel in its dealings with the Palestinians, but no comment about the activities of the terrorist group, Hezbollah, and of Hamas.
No investigation
The most glaring example of the council’s failure to be objective is its refusal to investigate charges by independent human rights organizations that China and Russia have provided arms to the Islamic government in Sudan which have been used in the civil war against non-Arab ethnic Africans in Darfur province.
With a such record of failure, the U.N. Human Rights Council must undergo major change. If the General Assembly refuses to do what is necessary to ensure that the panel fulfills its mandate, then President Bush and Congress should demonstrate their displeasure by withholding funds.
The House and the Senate, on bipartisan votes, have passed amendments to appropriations bills saying that no funding for the U.N. can go the Human Rights Council unless the president determines that U.S. national interest is at stake, or the U.S. gets a seat.
When the council was created in mid-2006 to replace the discredited U.N. Human Rights Commission, the U.S. chose not to make a bid for a seat because, administration officials said, too many rogue nations had been elected.
But critics of the U.S. say that it didn’t have the support of the General Assembly and its rejection would have been a major embarrassment.
In retrospect, it’s a good thing the U.S. did not get a seat. Its presence on the council would have drawn attention away from the misbehavior of the Islamic states and their allies.
Wrong people
Now, the world has seen what happens when the wrong people are put in positions of authority. The council has adopted procedures that make it difficult for members to name specific counties for human rights violations; mandate special investigators of rights abuses in Cuba and Belarus; and subject Israel to permanent censure under a fixed agenda item.
These procedures must be changed before the United States commits any money to the council.
The bottom line is that the U.N. Human Rights Council, which replaced the failed human rights commission, has itself failed to restore the credibility of the United Nations with regard to human rights violations.