U.S. Will Not Join U.N. Rights Council

[Coexist]

The Washington Post ran this article today, which I stumbled across on Micheal Moore's website.

I know a lot has been going on, but the headline alone provoked a pregnant pause, soon followed by a stunned WTF moment. Have we really given up on the pretense of believing in Human Rights?

UNITED NATIONS, April 6 -- The Bush administration will not seek a seat this year on the new U.N. Human Rights Council, marking the first time in more than half a century that the United States has chosen not to pursue membership in the United Nations' principal rights organization.

<snip>
The decision announced today was influenced in part, officials said, by concerns that the United States might have failed to win one of the seven seats reserved for Western governments. The United States has faced sharp criticism at the U.N. for alleged abuse of terrorism detainees. Meanwhile, Cuba and China, which have troubled human rights records, stand a strong chance of winning election to the council by secret ballot in May, according to senior U.S. and U.N. diplomats.

The Human Rights Council was established last month to replace the 60-year-old Human Rights Commission, which had been derided in recent years for allowing countries with abysmal rights records, such as Sudan and Zimbabwe, to join and thwart criticism of their actions. The United States, which was voted off the commission for one year in 2001, has always sought membership in the U.N. agency since its creation in 1946.

<snip>
The debate over the proper U.S. role on the new council has also played out in Congress, where several leaders, including Rep. Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.), chairman of the House International Relations Committee, and Sens. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.) and Norm Coleman (R-Minn.), have urged the administration to join what they see as an imperfect U.N. agency and improve it from within. "I think we should engage in the process," Hyde said in a March 27 news conference at the United Nations. "It is the best that's available and you do what you can do with what you have at hand."

But Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) wrote to President Bush Thursday to say that U.S. "participation in this new, unreformed council only undermines our own credibility and confers unwarranted legitimacy."

"I am very concerned that your administration now may provide financial support to this discredited council, and may even seek a seat on this body," he wrote.

What has gone wrong, people?

[baldguy]

1. Because the US also abuses human rights as a matter of policy

just like China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Iran and other "rogue" nations.

[bullimiami]

2. the bush junta has started a war of agression and has tortured.

he overthrew a democratic government in haiti and replaced it with a repressive criminal cabal.
he tried to overthrow the democratic government of venezuela.

whats gone wrong? they are not welcome, so they pretend not to want it.

bushco has brought worldwide shame on this country like none other in our history.

[Sinti]

3. They also want no part in the international criminal court

or the convention on the rights of the child. Sometimes I think they envy and aspire to become more like their Saudi friends, with slaves and public executions. They'll say anything to discredit any attempt at increasing civility and common decency in this world. It's a dark time for all of us.

[Coexist]

4. a strange thought I once had about that Saudi-envy thing,

was that Bush, as one who seems to like being part of the In-Crowd, must suffer bouts of humiliation when with his Saudi (or Dubai) friends, when the pesky public, Congress or Senate derail his 'done-deal' handshake CEO mentality that he has.

I was watching clips of him with Middle Eastern leaders during the Dubai deal, and I had this flash of being-in-his-shoes. A man like him must be tormented thinking that the leaders of those all-powerful male-dominated societies, monarchies - my say is the be all-end all of your world - must be snickering behind his back. Unmanning him. When deals he set in motion with all the assurance of a despot get derailed, and he is powerless to do anything about it.

What a tough row he has set himself to hoe.

What fun to watch the arrogance drain out of him to be replaced with childish outrage at his impotence.

[Sinti]

5. Interesting observation

I bet he does get his ego blown now and again when he makes promises, thinking he's all powerful, and then can't deliver -- where his friends could. :nopity:

[BrklynLiberal]

6. It would be the ultimate of hypocrisy

Bolton did not even want to fund it.

http://www.tpmcafe.com/node/27311

Bolton has Been Trying to Kill the Human Rights Council from the Beginning

By Steve Clemons

Ivo Daalder over at America Abroad has sided with John Bolton and called me out (in a friendly way) over the brewing UN Human Rights Council mess.

New York Times and Washington Post editorialists are falling over themselves to give John Bolton credit for being an unrelenting advocate for global human rights protections. Daalder is extending the same accolades to Bolton.

But what has really been going on is that John Bolton has been trying to kill the Human Rights Council from the beginning.