The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson was replaced yesterday by the Brazilian Sergio Vieira de Mello, a longtime UN diplomat. The transition is going to be a tricky one, because the governments that dominate the UN Commission for Human Rights (CHR) are increasingly trying to protect themselves -- and their allies -- from any scrutiny or criticism.
During the last annual session of the CHR, held in Geneva last spring, the body voted one by one to ignore severe human rights violations in such places as Russia/Chechnya, Zimbabwe, Iran and Equatorial Guinea. For several other violators -- such as China, Algeria, Uzbekistan, Vietnam and Saudi Arabia -- the commission couldn't even muster the will to put their abuses on its agenda. It also cut back on several country-specific monitoring mechanisms, compromising one of the most powerful of human rights tools, that of naming and shaming.
This is happening, in part, because countries with vile human rights records -- Algeria, Burundi, China, Cuba, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Indonesia, Kenya, Libya, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, and Vietnam -- command a powerful bloc within the CHR. They compose a near majority on the 53-member body. In 2003, Zimbabwe will join them and, unless African countries reverse an earlier decision, Libya will chair this body for a year.
ILLUSTRATION: YU SHA
Such countries go out of their way to secure seats on the commission and then actively work to build alliances with pliable governments. In addition, they have developed a number of clever procedural ploys to undermine the commission.
Their resolve to render the commission toothless is not matched by a balancing impulse on the part of the traditional promoters of human rights in the West. To some extent, this is because -- all rhetoric notwithstanding -- human rights rank relatively low among these governments' priorities. Trade often trumps human rights and governments, especially in Europe, are often loath to jeopardize lucrative contacts when govern-ments that violate human rights retaliate at being criticized.
These tendencies have been compounded more recently by the war against terrorism. Western democracies are unwilling to irritate important allies in the counter-terrorism struggle simply because they might be violating the rights of their own citizens.
During the past year, for the first time in its history, the US was not a member of the commission (though it will be regaining its seat in 2003). You might think that America's absence contributed to the CHR's sorry state as, in the past, the US was often principled and outspoken on some issues, in particular regarding certain specific abusive countries. But you would be wrong.
Increasingly obsessed at the prospect of its own citizens and practices coming under international scrutiny, the US has over the past few years contributed to the general erosion of the UN human rights monitoring system. It adamantly opposed several important and promising new human rights initiatives, notably the International Criminal Court and a new anti-torture mechanism.
On the anti-torture protocol, the US sought to derail the creation of a universal system of visits to places of detention, under an optional protocol to the Convention Against Torture. Here America found itself allied with some strange bedfellows that it normally rebukes as chronic human rights violators -- Cuba, China, Iran, Libya, Sudan and Zimbabwe.
Yet, without US support, the initiative was overwhelmingly endorsed in late July by the UN's Economic and Social Council.
Of course, not everything in the UN's human rights picture is uniformly bleak.
The International Criminal Court will be beginning its work soon, and with greater international support than expected, thanks to America's efforts to undermine it. The universal system of visits to places of detention is gaining ground. Even at the CHR, there has been some recent progress, for example, on work to establish "disappearances" as an international crime.
Here, countries with fresh memories of repressive rule, such as Latin American and East European nations, have increasingly taken the lead in promoting human rights initiatives and defending the principles. (Latin America, in particular, played a pivotal role in all the situations described above.)
All the same, manipulation by powerful countries and the foes of human rights have left the commission in bad shape.
Vieira de Mello -- who has had a distinguished career in the UN system and is a brilliant diplomat -- must be willing and able to draw on his own region and on others to make sure that the UN human rights system serves the victims rather than the violators. But he will also need to entice the West into becoming more pro-active and the US in particular into re-establishing its role as a constructive rather than destructive force in human rights affairs.
Joanna Weschler, a onetime activist in Poland's "Solidarity" movement, represents the Human Rights Watch at the UN.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
RSS