Human Rights

Rather predictibly, Jonah Goldberg is displeased with the Obama administration's decision to join the UN Human Rights Council. 

The Obama administration, which passionately believes in the U.N. as a force for good, thinks it can change the council simply by being on it. "We have a record of abject failure from having stayed out. We've been out for the duration, and it has not gotten better. It's arguably gotten worse," Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., told Politico. "We are much better placed to be fighting for the principles we believe in ... by leading and lending our voice from within."

But such thinking is only possible if you think the U.N. is a democratic, deliberative body. It isn't. Some of the member nations are liberal democracies. Some are backward, cruel regimes with well-coiffed front men who only do their masters' bidding. Valuing villains as equal to democrats is a recipe for moral rot.

Whether Jonah Goldberg likes it or not, the Human Rights Council exists and continue to do so for the foreseeable future.  The point of joining the Human Rights Council is so that the United States can exert influence over the body, help steer its decisions, and protect the interests of itself and its allies.

To that later end, I'm sort of shocked by some of the outrage directed at this decision from erstwhile friends of Israel.  Would not Jonah Goldberg and Anne Bayefsky prefer a staunch defender of Israel to join the Council?  After all, some of the decisions of the Human Rights Council have real world consequences.  For example, the Human Rights Council recently agreed to send Judge Richard Goldstone to examine alleged war crimes stemming from Operation Cast Lead. As I noted in an earlier post Goldstone is not easily dismissed as someone with an anti-Israel agenda--he is a lion of international law and has strong ties to the country. 

As a consequence of action at the Human Rights Council, the Israeli government is in the tough spot of having to decide whether or not to cooperate with Goldstone's inquiry. If it does not cooperate, it faces further international isolation. If it does cooperate, then perhaps Goldstone will come to conclusions that embarrass Israel?   (For the record, I am in favor of cooperation; a thorough accounting of what happened during Operation Cast Lead could help provide the foundation for a lasting peace.) 

Still, I'm sure that this is a decision the Israeli government would prefer it did not have to make.  Presumably, if the United States held a seat on the Council, Washington would be better positioned to prevent such an outcome in the first place.   

Now, I don't mean to concern troll.   I support the United States joining the Council because I believe a strong international human rights regime is in America's best interests and in the interests of humanity. But surely even skeptics like Bayesfky and Jonah Goldberg see that there are good "reasons of state" for American ascension to the Council?

(Image from Flickr of  the Human Rights Torch Relay) 

The UN Human Rights Council has tapped a lion of international law, Judge Richard Goldstone, to head an investigation into alleged war crimes in Gaza during the December-January war.  The timing of this is pretty interesting.   Two weeks ago a group of Israeli soldiers claimed that permissive rules of engagement lead directly to the deaths of civilians and the needless destruction of their property.  Earlier this week, the Israeli army said the soldiers "purposefully exaggerated" their claims and closed an internal investigation into alledged abuses during Operation Cast Lead.  Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch says it has evidence that the Israeli Defense Forces used White Phosphorous, a flammable chemical agent, in populated areas (included a UN school).

Israel has yet to say whether or not it will cooperate with Goldstone's investigation, though it would be pretty hard not to.  Goldstone was a former prosecutor of the Yugoslav and Rwandan war crimes tribunals. He was also a famous anti-apartheid judicial activist in South Africa, in 1991 Nelson Mandela tapped him to chair a legal inquiry into human rights abuses committed by the South African government. This later became known as the Goldstone Commission.  And though he is a South African, he has deep ties to Israel. (He is a trustee at Hebrew University).  From the New York Times.  

Goldstone said he was ''shocked, as a Jew,'' to be invited to head the mission.

''It adds an additional dimension,'' said Gladstone, who is on the board of governors at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. ''I've taken a deep interest in what happens in Israel. I'm associated with organizations that have worked in Israel. And I believe I can approach the daunting task that I have accepted in an evenhanded and impartial manner.''

It will be hard for critics to dismiss Judge Goldstone as some crank with a grudge, like some did to Richard Falk, the Special Rapporteur on Palestinian Rights.  More to the point, Goldstone brings to this job a sterling reputation as an impartial voice whose enduring loyalty has been to international law and justice.   A thorough accounting of what did and did not happen during Operation Cast Lead (and of course, of Hamas rocket attacks) can help serve as a foundation for a lasting peace in the region.  Judge Goldstone is the perfect person to lead this kind of inquiry.

This is nice:

Today, Mogens Jensen takes off to the Himalayas where he will be highlighting the importance of Human Rights and the Millennium Development Goals.

Among all of the equipment in his backpack, Jensen included two unusual items which he intends to take to the top of Mount Everest: the U.N. flag and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The expedition will take place toward the middle or the end of May. Before the ascent, Jensen will participate in a ceremony with more than 60 Danish mountain climbers.

At a press conference in Copenhagen yesterday, Jakob Simonsen, the Head of UNDP's Nordic Office, gave Jensen a copy of the Declaration and flag.

”It is a great honour for me to cooperate with the UN and bring the Human Rights to the top and commemorate the anniversary. Human Rights affect us all and should never be taken for granted. For me it is a huge motivation factor bringing the Human Rights to the top of the world,” said Jensen.

(image from flickr)

 It looks like New Zealand has officially pulled out of contention for the third seat reserved for Western countries on the UN Human Rights Council. This paves the way for  the unopposed election of United States. 

On the one hand, the decision by the United States to join the council sends an excellent message to the rest of the world that the United States is ready to engage diplomatically in multi-lateral forums.  With a seat at the table, the United States will be in a better position to guide the work of the council and pursue American interests there.  The Israelis (who have often been the target of council statements)  seem to agree.  

Still, I'm somewhat disappointed that the United States will run unopposed.

To win a seat on the Human Rights Council, countries must secure the votes of at least two-thirds an absulte majority (97 votes) of the General Assembly.  Each regional bloc is assigned a set number of seats and all too often regional groups negotiate internally to put up a slate of candidates equal to the number of seats available.  This can result in the inclusion of countries on the human rights council that probably should not be there.

I do believe if the United States ran in a four way race with New Zealand, Norway, and Belgium the United States would win.  And in winning a competetive election,  the United States would affirm the procedures that make the council stronger in the long term.

Ah, well.  I guess I should just be pleased that the United States decided to join in the first place.

Fresh from the State Department:

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and U.S. Permanent Representative to the U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice announce that the United States will seek a seat this year on the United Nations Human Rights Council with the goal of working to make it a more effective body to promote and protect human rights.

The decision is in keeping with the Obama Administration's "new era of engagement" with other nations to advance American security interests and meet the global challenges of the 21st century.

“Human rights are an essential element of American global foreign policy” said Secretary Clinton. “With others, we will engage in the work of improving the UN human rights system to advance the vision of the UN Declaration on Human Rights. The United States helped to found the United Nations and retains a vital stake in advancing that organization's genuine commitment to the human rights values that we share with other member nations. We believe every nation must live by and help shape global rules that ensure people enjoy the right to live freely and participate fully in their societies.”

The big question is whether or not the United States will run in a contested election. There are three open seats on the council reserved for the Western Europe and Other Group if which the United States belongs.  Norway, Belgium, and New Zealand are already announced candidates for the May 15 elections.  With the United States running, will one of these countries pull out?  (Perhaps, say, New Zealand, which was just rewarded with the head of the UN Development Program?) I sure hope not.  Competitive elections are good for the system. Uncompetitive elections are how countries with less than stellar human rights records sometimes make it on the council. In all, though, this is a good move by the United States.  It is much easier to guide the work of these sorts of forums as a participant on the inside than a critic from the outside.

"The United States supports the U.N.'s statement on human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity and is pleased to join the other 66 U.N. member states who have declared their support of the statement," said State Department spokesman Robert Wood.

"The United States is an outspoken defender of human rights and critic of human rights abuses around the world," Wood told reporters. "As such, we join with other supporters of this statement, and we will continue to remind countries of the importance of respecting the human rights of all people in all appropriate international fora."

The Associated Press reported on Tuesday that the administration would endorse the declaration.