Support the Creation of a UN Human Rights Council

Jimmy Carter, Óscar Arias, Kim Dae Jung, Shirin Ebadi and Desmond Tutu, all Nobel Peace Prize laureates, have an op-ed piece in the New York Times supporting the creation of a Human Rights Council in the United Nations. (Free registration required.)

For years there has been a Human Rights Commission in the United Nations. Unfortunately, many of the governments that most infringed upon human rights named representatives to the Commission. It is now proposed to replace the Commission with a new Human Rights Council. (The change from a Commission reporting to the Economic and Social Council to a Council would be a step up in the U.N. hierarchy.) The Economist has a current article with more background. (Subscription required.)

John Bolton, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, opposes the plan. He is quoted as saying

“We WANT a butterfly, we don't intend to put lipstick on a caterpillar and call it a success.”

I suspect we want both a United Nations Council on Human Rights, and another mechanism limited to nations which strongly support human rights. To paraphrase Bolton, remembering Muhammed Ali's phrase "float like a butterfly, sting like a bee!

The United Nations has been a useful place for discussions among nations on human rights. The General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on 10 December 1948. I suggest that discussions among governments with very different attitudes towards human rights are important. They raise consciousness about human rights, and some countries seek to avoid embarassment before the world that condemnation by such a tribunal might entail. An upgraded Human Rights Council, created after months of negotiations, might provide a new and better venue for such discussions.

I suggest, however, that a discussion forum may not be the best place for all human rights activities and purposes. Thus the Helsinki Accords were agreed upon at the The Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe held in 1975. In this setting the United States and its European allies could come to a important agreement with the Soviet Union with important human rights aspects.

Non-governmental organizations, such as Human Rights Watch, also play an important, complementary role to the U.N. talk shop.

I suggest, however, that when drastic action is an urgent necessity, the countries that are willing and capable of such action may need alternative international mechanisms. While interventions have been possible in some cases (e.g. the NATO intervention at Kosovo), in other cases (e.g. Sudan currently, Rwanda) international intervention has been "too little, too late." I don't suppose a U.N. Council formed by 47 governments will be either decisive or quick.

Perhaps a Global Consortium for Human Rights, created by treaty among human rights respecting nations with strong membership requirements might be better.