U.S. Opposition to Panel Frustrates Annan 
The Associated Press
March 3, 2006
The New York Times
Original Source: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-UN-Human-Rights.html

UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- The United States has become increasingly isolated in its opposition to the proposed U.N. Human Rights Council, with close European allies and Japan joining other countries, human rights groups a dozen Nobel Peace Prize winners in backing the new body.
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan told reporters Thursday he was ''chagrined about the U.S. position'' and didn't know how the issue would be resolved. But he expressed hope that the United States ''will find some way of associating itself with the other member states.''
''I don't think we should see it as isolating the U.S., or the U.S. versus the others,'' he said. ''We are in this together.''
The Human Rights Council would replace the discredited U.N. Human Rights Commission, which has been criticized for allowing some of the worst rights-offending countries to use their membership to protect one another from condemnation, or to criticize others. In recent years, commission members have included Sudan, Libya, Zimbabwe and Cuba.
U.N. General Assembly President Jan Eliasson spent the last five months overseeing often contentious negotiations before producing a compromise proposal last week. Annan warned that unraveling the proposal would mean the U.N. would be left with the discredited commission.
While no country got everything it wanted, many said the draft would strengthen the U.N.'s human rights efforts. Japan and the European Union signed on Wednesday night.
But the United States announced Monday that it would vote against the council unless the draft was renegotiated to correct what it views as serious deficiencies, especially the chance that human rights abusers could become members.
Asked Thursday about the growing support for the council, U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said: ''We understood what the lay of the land was when we made our decision that the current draft was unacceptable.''
Many supporters have warned that new negotiations would weaken the resolution, though Bolton has said there's no evidence to support that argument.
Bolton told reporters that since there is little interest in renegotiating the text, the options are to put off action for a few months or put the draft to a vote.
Japan's U.N. Ambassador Kenzo Oshima said he believed ''there is a broad consensus'' among member states that it was time to vote.
''But they're also asking the question ... what is the meaning, what is the value without the U.S.?'' he said. ''I think there will have to be just a bit of cooling off for members to ponder and for the president to think about the way forward.''
Britain's U.N. Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry said his country backs the proposal but believes the council will need U.S. support to be effective. He said Britain backs more discussions to gain wider support.
The United States had lobbied for a permanent Human Rights Council of 30 countries chosen primarily for their commitment to human rights by a two-thirds vote of the General Assembly, to try to keep rights abusers off.
Under the compromise proposal, the 53-member Human Rights Commission would be replaced by a 47-member Human Rights Council elected by an absolute majority of the 191-member General Assembly.
Eliasson stressed the draft would require every council member to ''uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights'' and have their human rights record reviewed during their three-year term. Eventually, all 191 U.N. member states would face such scrutiny.
Bolton said the U.S. still wants members to be elected by a two-thirds vote and opposes a two-term limit for a country to serve on the council.