US reaffirms “no” vote on new UN rights council

By Irwin Arieff

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – U.S. Ambassador John Bolton
acknowledged on Thursday he was isolated in opposing a draft
plan for a new U.N. human rights body but would still demand a
vote and vote “no” if the plan came up for approval.

Within hours of word that Washington had not softened its
stand against the proposed new Human Rights Council, U.N.
General Assembly President Jan Eliasson announced he would
delay until next week his plans to bring up the proposal at a
Friday meeting of the 191-nation General Assembly.

Friday would have been the assembly’s last chance to take
up the plan before the discredited U.N. Human Rights Commission
opens its next session in Geneva on Monday.

Most rights groups and virtually all U.N. members are
leaning on the United States to endorse the plan, arguing the
new rights body, while not without flaws, would be a big
improvement.

But backers of a new council, intended to expose human
rights abusers and help nations draw up rights legislation,
have said they would seek assembly action only if there was
advance agreement to approve the plan by consensus.

They fear calling for a vote would lead to paragraph-by-
paragraph voting that would likely end up gutting the plan.

Bolton said in late February that the blueprint for a new
rights council, drawn up by Eliasson, had “manifold
deficiencies.”

He said he was under instructions from Washington to reopen
negotiations in hopes of revising the text. Alternatively, the
United States wanted the assembly to postpone a decision for
several months on the new rights body, he said.

COUNTRIES LINE UP AGAINST BOLTON PLEA

Washington had sought high barriers to membership by rights
abusers, which had come to dominate the Human Rights
Commission.

It also objected to a rule that countries could not be
immediately re-elected after serving two consecutive terms — a
provision that would deny the United States a permanent seat.

Rights groups and most governments argued that reopening
the text would lead to its defeat.

After two weeks of lobbying, Bolton acknowledged there was
no enthusiasm for new negotiations. “Country after country
tells us they don’t want to reopen the text,” he said. “If you
don’t reopen the text, you can’t fix it.”

Some Western diplomats are still hoping a deal could be
made with the United States by getting some 60 countries to
assure Washington they would not allow major abusers to get a
seat on the new council. Bolton gave no indication that would
suffice.

An ad hoc coalition of 32 rights groups including Amnesty
International, Human Rights Watch and the International
Federation of Human Rights Leagues issued an urgent appeal to
all U.N. members to support the Eliasson draft as “a sound
basis to strengthen the U.N. human rights machinery.”

“The U.S. administration should not jeopardize the best
chance in decades to establish a more effective U.N. human
rights body,” Amnesty Secretary-General Irene Khan said.