Human Rights

The hits just keep on coming for the anti-racism Durban Review Conference scheduled to kick off next week.  Germany will join Australia, Canada, the United States, and Italy in boycotting the conference.  I think it is safe to say that our expectations about what this conference will achieve should be substantially lowered.  As in other UN forums, a disunified Europe plus non-participation by the commonwealth and the United States generally means that more regressive regional blocs will hold sway.   Such is the consequence of non-participation.  Things could get ugly next week.

READ MORE

The world’s largest democracy goes to the polls today for the first phase of  multi-stage parliamentary elections.  By mid May, 714 million voters will cast ballots at 800,000 polling stations. There are, all told, 1,715 candidates for office. But one of these political hopefuls is unlike any other candidate India has ever seen. Her name is Daya Rani Kinnar and she is a transsexual activist.

From the Hindustan Times:

Kinnar is a popular figure in Ghaziabad and will stand for election as an independent candidate. “I don’t mind taking on all the political heavyweights. I was born in Ghaziabad and people know me. I don’t have children. I will work only for people. I am going to give a tough fight to Rajnath Singh, who is an outsider. The sitting MP did nothing for the constituency,” Kinnar said.

Kinnar, founder of Sarva Samaj Sewa Samiti (a welfare organisation), promises a safe, developed Ghaziabad district.

Although illiterate, Kinnar is confident. City roads are already lined with her banners and hoardings. In these, she appears with a bindi on her forehead and head draped in a sari.

She is banking on the electorate’s disenchantment with politicians. “I am just like a ‘no-vote option’ button on electronic voting machines,” she said.

Unfortunately, the Indian press identifies her as a “eunuch.” Still, just the fact that she feels empowered to put herself in the public lime light is itself a remarkable achievement in a society known for conservative cultural mores.   This video from Russia Today reminds me that one courageous person can help break these barriers.

READ MORE

Via Reuters, the Israeli government communicated to the UN Human Rights Council that it will not cooperate with an investigation into alleged Israeli and Hamas crimes surrounding the December 2008-January 2009 Israeli incursion into Gaza.  The inquiry is to be lead by Judge Richard Goldstone, a highly regarded South African jurist and international humanitarian law scholar.  

This is a shame.  A decision to not cooperate with the investigation  implies that Israel believes it has something to hide.  I say this because Goldstone is the type of person who has no agenda but to get at the truth. 

Over  the long run, a public accounting of what did and did not happen during Operation Cast Lead can help lay the foundation for a lasting peace in the region.  Let the man do his job.

READ MORE

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) 

READ MORE