17 - 23 May 2001
Issue No.534
|
Al-Ahram Weekly On-line 17 - 23 May 2001 Issue No.534 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
Bastion blackmail
Washington is all in a lather over the US being "kicked off" the UN Human Rights Commission. Money, as always, is the American cudgel of choice in its relations with the UN, writes Thomas Gorguissian from the US capital
When the United States lost its seat on the UN Human Rights Commission, the highly publicised defeat created a great debate in Washington. Some asked for explanations, while others criticised the administration "which let this happen." And the House of Representatives voted to withhold US dues to the UN.
"The decision was an outrageous decision," US President Bush told a news conference. "To me it undermines the whole credibility of this commission, to kick the United States off, one of the great bastions of human rights, and allow Sudan to be on. ... I think most reasonable people in the world see it that way." In the same press conference last Friday, following a meeting with UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, President Bush went on to criticise the House vote: "I think we have made an agreement with the United Nations, an agreement that had been negotiated in good faith, and I think we ought to pay our dues."
The House voted 252 to 165 on Thursday to pay $582 million in back dues owed to the UN, but to withhold an additional $244 million until the United States is restored to the human rights panel. Congressmen Henry Hyde, chairman of the International Relations Committee, and Tom Lantos, the panel's top Democrat, wrote the provision, reflecting Congressional wrath. "This will teach countries a lesson," said Lantos. "Actions have consequences. If they would like to get this payment, they will vote us back on the commission. If they don't, it will cost them $244 million."
An editorial in the conservative Washington Times declared: "There's no reason for the United States to fund a commission of rogues." The Bush administration opposed the measure, but Republican leaders in Congress nonetheless championed the fight to punish the UN.
"Passage by one house is the beginning of a long journey," Hyde announced. Secretary of State Colin Powell, expressing the administration's view, said, "We didn't support it; we didn't feel it was the right approach." Many agreed, including former UN representatives Richard Holbrooke, Jeanne Kirkpatrick and Bill Richardson. Kirkpatrick, US ambassador to the United Nations during the Reagan administration, pointed at the Europeans -- "our allies" -- who played a significant role in the US defeat. In an op-ed piece she forecast: "The US will never be able to achieve or even work toward our goals in the UN if, in addition to opposing our adversaries, we must also compete with our best friends. Our one vote can never win against the EU's 15." In a panel discussion, she agreed that there is "ongoing resentment" toward America, especially in Europe.
The administration was criticised for not working hard enough to guarantee the votes -- and for taking the US seat on the commission for granted. In addition, it was pointed out that there is presently no envoy to the UN, and thus no one who can follow up US relations with the UN's various bodies.
President Bush has named John Negroponte as US ambassador to the UN, but has not sent the nomination to the Senate for confirmation. "This is not about the UN, per se. It's about our ability to work carefully and closely in cooperation with our European allies -- the other great democracies of the world -- on such important issues. And we have to have an environment in our relationship with Western Europe that enables us to get them with us on a lot of these issues," Ambassador William Luers, head of the UN Association of the US, said in a TV interview. He pointed out that unless the Bush administration is prepared to work more cooperatively on a whole range of international questions, "I think we're going to find this type of issue happening more and more often. And it will be to our detriment and the world's detriment if we are sort of set aside in the UN and in other international organisations."
Various opinion articles and editorials referred to the US's "arrogance" and "rogue" behaviour. In particular, it was emphasised that the Bush administration is ignoring US allies and adopting a cavalier attitude -- on the Kyoto Protocol, the Missile Defense System and other international issues -- assuming that it can "behave however it chooses." The administration is paying a price for some of its policies and attitudes, critics said. "I think there's a sock-back for the unilateralism and the allergies to treaties that this administration is developing," said former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.
On the other hand, Senator Jesse Helms, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said: "Well, if the rest of the world is going to retaliate against us for taking the positions that ought to be taken in defence of this country, well, they can go fly a kite." Addressing the issue of the US defeat, he added: "I don't think we ought to keep cool about this thing. Here we are, the heaviest contributor to the UN by far, and to be kicked around like this, this is an outrage in my opinion."
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page