{"id":113618,"date":"2018-07-02T12:02:01","date_gmt":"2018-07-02T11:02:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=113618"},"modified":"2018-07-02T08:00:49","modified_gmt":"2018-07-02T07:00:49","slug":"the-u-s-withdraws-again-from-the-un-human-rights-council","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2018\/07\/the-u-s-withdraws-again-from-the-un-human-rights-council\/","title":{"rendered":"The U.S. Withdraws (Again) from the UN Human Rights Council"},"content":{"rendered":"

24 Jun 2018 – <\/em>This is a slightly edited and corrected version of what was published on TMS<\/em> last week<\/a>. I owe particular thanks to my distinguished collaborator, Virginia Tilley, for pointing out several shortcomings and misleading formulations in the earlier version. Of course, the essence of the indictment of the U.S. rationale for withdrawal stands as before.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Explicitly focusing on alleged anti-Israel bias the U.S. withdrew from further participation in the UN Human Rights Council until it reforms itself in accord with the liking of the Trump Administration. The only internationally credible basis for criticizing the HRC is its regrettable tendency to put some countries with the worst human rights records in leading roles, creating genuine issues of credibility and hypocrisy. Of course, I would have expected Ambassador Nikki Haley to refrain from such a criticism as it could only embarrass Washington to admit that many of its closest allies in the Middle East, and elsewhere have lamentable human rights records, and, if fairly judged, the U.S. has itself reversed roles since the year 2000, having itself slipping into the category of the most serious human rights offenders.<\/p>\n

In this regard, the U.S. \u2018withdrawal\u2019 could be most constructively viewed as a self-imposed \u2018suspension\u2019 for falling short when it comes to the promotion and protection of human rights, absenting itself until it can protect human rights in its own society at a high enough standard as to make it less laughable than when it lectures the world about the human rights failures of others, naturally America\u2019s current list of adversaries. But Haley is not someone intimidated by reality. In her fiery withdrawal speech she has the audacity to say that the first objective of the U.S. is \u201cImproving the quality of Council membership.\u201d She adds, \u201c(w)hen a so-called Human Rights cannot bring itself to address the massive of abuses of Venezuela and Iran..the Council ceases ceaces to be worthy of its name.\u201d Making such an argument, politically charged at best, raises eyebrows of scorn if one takes note of the deafening silence of Washington with respect to Saudi Arabia, Israel, and Egypt to mention just three Middle Eastern allies.<\/p>\n

Undoubtedly, the U.S. was frustrated by its efforts to \u2018reform\u2019 the HRC according to its views\u00a0 of the UN agency should function, and blamed its traditional adversaries, Russia, China, Venezuela, Cuba, along with Egypt, with blocking its initiative. It also must not have welcomed the HRC High Commissioner, Zeid Ra\u2019ad al-Hussein, for describing the \u2018zero tolerance policy\u2019 of separating children from their immigrant parents at the Mexican border as an \u2018unconsciounable\u2019 policy.<\/p>\n

In evaluating this latest sign of American retreat from its prior role as global leader, there are several considerations that help us understand such a move that situates the United States in the same strange rejectionist corner it now shares with North Korea and Eritrea:<\/p>\n