U.S. to Take “Reserved Approach” with the Human Rights Council
Friday, June 27, 2008
In a June 6 press briefing, Sean McCormack, Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs at the State Department, responded to queries asking whether the United States had decided to “cut all cooperation with the Council on Human Rights.” McCormack responded by saying that, because of the “pathetic record” of the HRC in regards to addressing violations of human rights, the U.S. will engage the HRC only when the Council is dealing with issues of “deep national interest.”
Theoretically, the Human Rights Council (HRC) is an integral part of what one commentator has referred to as the United Nations matrix of human rights governance networks. Practically, some HRC critics say that the Council has marginalized itself by placing a disproportionate emphasis on the consideration and adoption of Israel-bashing resolutions, while ignoring the practices of some of the world’s leading human rights violators. This has led the U.S. Department of State to express even greater reservations about the HRC.
The U.S. currently only has observer status at the HRC, after having refused to take a seat when the Council was created to replace the discredited Human Rights Commission in 2006. Yet McCormack says that they will take an even “more reserved approach in terms of engaging the Council.”
The interchange at the press briefing may have been in response to news reports stating that the U.S. intended to “halt its involvement in the Council” and that it had relinquished its observer status. However, contrary to these reports, McCormack gave no indication in his comments that the U.S. would give up its position as an observer at the HRC.
Jim Kelly is the President of Solidarity Center for Law and Justice, P.C., a public interest civil and human rights law firm based in Atlanta, Georgia. The opinions expressed herein are his own.
A JOINT PROGRAM OF
