U.S. to Vote Against New Rights Council 

March 15, 2006
The New York Times
Original Source: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-UN-Human-Rights.html?_r=1&oref=slogin


http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/u/united_nations/index.html?inline=nyt-org \o More articles about the United Nations. UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- The United States will vote against a proposal to create a new panel at the United Nations to replace the discredited Human Rights Commission, Washington's U.N. ambassador said.

The U.N. General Assembly will take up the resolution Wednesday, and a vote is likely even though assembly president Jan Eliasson has insisted he wants the new Human Rights Council to be approved by consensus of the 191 U.N. member states.

The United States argues that right abusers could still be elected to the new body under the proposed rules. U.S. Ambassador John Bolton insisted Tuesday the only way forward was to reopen negotiations, but Eliasson said members told him this would open ''Pandora's Box.''

World leaders at September's U.N. summit decided to create a new council to replace the commission, which has been criticized for allowing some of the worst rights-offending countries to use their membership to protect one another from condemnation. In recent years, members have included Sudan, Libya, Zimbabwe and Cuba.

The leaders left the details of establishing the council to Eliasson, who produced a compromise proposal late last month after lengthy negotiations.

No country got everything it wanted but many said the resolution would strengthen the U.N.'s human rights efforts and signed on -- as did the leading human rights organizations and a dozen Nobel Peace Prize winners.

The Americans want members of the council to be elected by a two-thirds vote, not the simple majority now called for, to help keep rights abusers out. They also want the text to explicitly bar any nation from joining the council if it is under sanction by the United Nations. The current draft says only that such measures would be taken into account when deciding membership.

Several key supporters of the proposed council -- the http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/e/european_union/index.html?inline=nyt-org \o More articles about the European Union. European Union, Canada, New Zealand and Switzerland -- have been trying to find a compromise that would overcome the U.S. objections.

They are trying to get as many countries as possible to sign a letter to the United States or make a statement in the General Assembly after a consensus vote that would address the U.S. concerns, said Canada's U.N. Ambassador Allan Rock.

The supporters want countries to make a commitment never to vote for a nation subject to Security Council sanctions for human rights abuses. They also want members to agree to a review of the new council in less than five years, which would enable the General Assembly to examine whether the panel should be a principal U.N. organ, Rock said.
If the council becomes a principal organ, it would take a two-thirds vote to become a member, as the U.S. wants.

But Bolton rejected any compromise that did not involve reopening negotiations on the resolution. He said efforts to find a compromise were progressing ''so far unsuccessfully because we've said repeatedly we want changes in the text on various key points.''

Diplomats said Eliasson has been working behind the scenes to try to ensure that if there is a vote, no amendments be proposed -- something that would almost likely weaken the resolution.

But Cuba has already circulated several proposed amendments, and other countries including Russia, Pakistan and the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which represents 57 countries, may also want to make changes, the diplomats said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the efforts were taking place behind closed doors.
Bolton said he expected a vote Wednesday and ''our position remains as it has been'' -- which is to vote no. That would raise the question of whether the United States would boycott the new body.

Several U.N. diplomats familiar with the negotiations said they expect the U.S. to cast ''a soft no'' and eventually seek membership in the Human Rights Council.