EDITORIAL Understandable cold shoulder at U.N.
An accumulation of resentments
against the United States and apparent lack of preparation by the Bush
administration led to the May 3 vote that denied America a seat on the
53-member United Nations Commission on Human Rights.
The administration has tried to demean the vote by labeling the
commission as one beholden now to the likes of Libya and Sudan. That is not
entirely true, of course. Nor was the vote entirely unjustified, nor should it
have come as a total surprise.
The nations of the Earth have a right to be annoyed at the way in
which the United States has treated the United Nations. While the United States
has ratified some of the U.N. covenants on human rights, we have essentially
nullified those covenants by insisting on reservations that, in essence, deny
any new commitment by the United States to engage in conduct required by the
United Nations.
The United Nations Human Rights Committee, which monitors the
compliance of signatory nations with the Covenant on Political and Civil
Rights, has sharply rebuked the United States for its reservations. The
committee claims the provisions violate the letter and the spirit of the U.N.
Covenants on Political Rights.
The United States has defied the United Nations in other ways. It
unilaterally walked out of the U.N.s Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization, UNESCO, because of alleged mismanagement. In 1999 the United
States refused to ratify the International Criminal Commission, although
President Clinton signed it in his last days in office. The United States has
refused to ratify the Covenant on the Elimination of Discrimination Against
Women and the Covenant on the Rights of the Child. Similarly the United States
refused to sign on to the Law of the Sea Treaty or to join the ban on land
mines.
The United States has also refused to send personnel to the 18
United Nations peacekeeping missions all around the world.
It is not lost on other members, either, that the United States
sought to use the United Nations Commission on Human Rights to beat up on
communist countries and especially annoyed human rights activists the world
over during the Reagan years by seeking to turn the commission into a
redbaiting forum.
Bush has not made many friends on the commission in recent months
with his proposal to abdicate the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and build the
anti-missile shield or Star Wars.
These are some of the reasons why certain members of the United
Nations used their secret ballot to vote the United States off the U.N.
Commission on Human Rights. The vote may also have been triggered by the
ineptitude of American diplomats associated with the United Nations.
According to former U.S. Rep. Geraldine Ferraro, who once was a
delegate to the commission, the Bush administration failed to do the
politicking necessary to ensure the vote. This should have been
anticipated, and this should have been prepared for, she said. We
should not have lost the vote.
The action in Geneva, however, may also have adverse consequences
for the United Nations. Members of Congress who want no abridgements of
Americas sovereignty can now fulminate that the United Nations is so
anti-American that the United States should not pay its dues. The amount that
had come due was almost a billion dollars. About half has been paid, but
Congress is threatening to withhold $244 million because of the loss of that
seat. The factions that promote American isolationism may once again issue
propaganda against any entangling alliances.
The United Nations Commission on Human Rights has had a long and
useful history. It does not have the legal power to punish nations, but for
more than 50 years it has scolded countries for their violations of human
rights -- often with salutary results.
Will Americas surprise humiliation at being voted off the
commission be a wake-up call? It seems unlikely but possible. The world has
heard that a significant number of nations feel that the United States should
not continue as a member of the worlds most important organization in the
area of human rights.
Unwelcome truths about our conduct come to all of us in strange
and unpredictable ways. Perhaps the United States will modify its arrogance and
seek to be a good neighbor in the family of nations. If that happens, the human
rights commission vote, however jarring, will have served some positive
purpose.
National Catholic Reporter, May 18,
2001
|