"Three and a half years after dramatically announcing its withdrawal from the UN Human Rights Council, the United States recently returned to the agency." Agence France-Presse reported. Recently, the 76th session of the United Nations General Assembly elected 18 members of the United Nations Human Rights Council, including the United States. Among them, the United States received 168 votes out of 193 votes, the second-to-last vote.
Is the U.S. return to the Human Rights Council for "human rights"? What will America's return bring to advance the work of the Human Rights Council and the global human rights cause? Experts pointed out that the return of the United States to the Human Rights Council has provided the possibility for the United States to improve its own human rights problems and participate in promoting the global human rights cause, but it must be vigilant against the US "politicization of human rights issues" plot.
"Withdrawing from the group" and "returning to the group" ——
Shameless political manipulation
In 2018, then-US President Donald Trump announced his withdrawal from the United Nations Human Rights Council. Nicky Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations at the time, called the U.N. Human Rights Council a "hypocritical and selfish" body and a "sinkhole of political bias." The United States' move to "willfully withdraw from the group" was widely criticized by the international community at the time.
The "entanglement" between the United States and the United Nations Human Rights Council has existed since the early days of the Human Rights Council. The 47-member UN Human Rights Council was established in 2006 to replace the much-criticized UN Commission on Human Rights, according to Radio France International. The George W. Bush administration opposed membership in the Human Rights Council, causing the United States not to join the agency until 2009, when the Obama administration said it wanted to work internally to improve the Human Rights Council. In June 2018, Trump announced his withdrawal from the Human Rights Council, citing the agency's "bias" against Israel and its failure to "protect human rights." In February 2021, the Biden administration announced that the United States would return to the United Nations Human Rights Council as an observer.
"The Biden administration's return to the Human Rights Council is to strengthen U.S. human rights claims around the world." During the presidential campaign, Biden promised to return the United States to the Human Rights Council if elected, the New York Times reported, and said his administration would "work to ensure that the agency truly lives up to its values." Speaking to the U.N. General Assembly this year, Biden claimed that one of America's three top priorities is to defend human rights, democracy and a rules-based international order.
Li Haidong, a professor at the Institute of International Relations of the China Foreign Affairs University, pointed out in an interview with this reporter that the return of the United States to the Human Rights Council is part of the Biden administration's foreign policy adjustment. The Biden administration has made human rights a key issue in U.S. foreign strategy, and its return to the Human Rights Council is in line with its diplomatic strategy. At the same time, the Biden administration believes that advancing the US political agenda on human rights issues on a global scale requires the path of multilateralism. As a result, the Biden administration has "corrected" the foreign policy of the previous administration and has been returning to the international organizations with which the previous administration withdrew, thereby returning to the center of the international arena. For the United States, the core purpose of returning to the Human Rights Council is not to participate, but to lead the organization. The United States hopes to increase its influence and voice on human rights issues and reoccupy the "moral high ground" of the so-called "human rights defenders." In the final analysis, the United States' return to the Human Rights Council is to use multilateral mechanisms such as the Human Rights Council to politicize human rights issues, so as to carry out shameless political manipulation that conforms to the geopolitical interests of the United States.
Bad deeds --
"Double standards" maintain hegemony
"The United States criticizes only the human rights records of its rival countries and condones human rights abuses in countries with which it is allies or countries with which it has a strategic interest." The Al Jazeera website reported.
The United States has a long history of poor human rights records around the world, which has not only been criticized by the Human Rights Council many times, but also aroused strong dissatisfaction in many countries. In August 2021, the UN Human Rights Council held a special session on Afghanistan, and representatives of many countries noted that the US military intervention has brought deep disasters to the Afghan people. In June 2020, the 43rd session of the UN Human Rights Council held an emergency debate on racism, the first time in the history of the Human Rights Council that an emergency meeting on human rights in the United States was convened. In November of the same year, when the United States was underwent the third round of country-specific human rights reviews by the United Nations Human Rights Council, it attracted severe criticism from the international community for racial discrimination... Whether it is the United States' domestic anti-epidemic efforts, democratic disorder, racial discrimination, social rift, the division between the rich and the poor, or the hegemonic acts such as the United States launching foreign wars, forcibly repatriating immigrants, blatantly "withdrawing from the group", and unilateral sanctions, the image of the "human rights defender" in the United States has been continuously damaged.
Human Rights Watch noted that despite the Biden administration's commitment to making human rights issues the cornerstone of its foreign policy, it has been powerless against the spread of racism since taking office. In addition to the structural racism that exists in American society, the Biden administration has been unable to address racial disparities in police abuse and incarceration rates.
"On the issue of human rights, the United States is keen to export the 'concept of human rights' and stubbornly adheres to the principle that 'human rights are above sovereignty' in the field of international human rights, thus interfering in the internal affairs of other countries." On the one hand, the United States is 'selectively blind' to its own bad deeds in the field of human rights, and on the other hand, it constantly uses human rights issues to interfere and suppress other countries. There are many deep reasons behind this 'double standard'. Mao Junxiang, executive director of the Human Rights Research Center of Central South University, analyzed in an interview with this reporter that first, the United States has extraordinary self-confidence in its own political system and human rights protection system, and this sense of superiority makes it unwilling to admit its own shortcomings on the human rights issue; second, in recent years, the relative strength of the United States has weakened, there is a strategic anxiety, and it is worried that the rising attractiveness of other countries' systems and roads will endanger its dominant position in the international ideological field, so it is therefore, The United States takes human rights issues as one of the pillars of its foreign strategy, and consolidates its dominant position in the international ideological field by hyping up issues on human rights issues, slandering other countries, and creating obstacles to the development of other countries from the ideological field.
"Pull a small circle" -
"Human rights" are used as political tools
In a recent statement, linda Thomas-Greenfield, the current U.S. ambassador to the United States, said the United States "will use every tool at our disposal, from proposing resolutions and amendments to voting when needed." Our goal is clear: to stand with human rights defenders against human rights violations and abuses. She also pledged that the United States would oppose the Human Rights Council's excessive focus on Israel, would oppose elections to countries with poor human rights records, and encourage countries committed to promoting and protecting human rights at home and abroad to seek membership. "China is one of the biggest concerns of the White House," she declared. ”
"The U.S. politicization of human rights issues has a long history." Mao Junxiang analyzed that since the end of the Cold War, the United States has begun to use the human rights issue to provoke political confrontation, although the specific ways and means have changed, but this politicized thinking continues to this day. In particular, in terms of its China strategy, the United States has attempted to put China into a passive defensive state in the field of human rights by frequently hyping up Xinjiang-related and Hong Kong-related human rights issues. This is a new "way of playing" in which the United States uses the issue of human rights, and it continues the old line of thinking of politicizing the issue of human rights.
"One of the major functions of the Human Rights Council is to strengthen understanding, exchange and dialogue on human rights issues in countries at different stages of civilizational development, and to provide a platform for cooperation in resolving human rights issues." Li Haidong said that the return of the United States to the Human Rights Council has provided a dialogue channel and a platform for cooperation for the United States to improve its own human rights issues and participate in promoting the global human rights cause. However, in view of the previous "bad habits" and "black history" of the United States on human rights issues, the Human Rights Council must be vigilant against the bad intentions of the United States to use human rights issues as a political tool to ensure its own geopolitical superiority, so as to avoid being distorted by the United States in its normal functioning.
Mao Junxiang pointed out that the return of the United States to the Human Rights Council is one of the actions of the United States to return to multilateralism, which is worthy of affirmation. But multilateralism in the United States is one of great ideological and limited multilateralism. When the United States returns to the Human Rights Council, it will use ideology to "pull small circles" to form value alliances and form political groups. This could lead to divisions within the Human Rights Council and politicization of human rights issues, with a negative impact on the proper functioning of the Human Rights Council. In addition, the United States is likely to use this platform to continue to "stir up trouble" on the China issue and continue to hype up Xinjiang-related and Hong Kong-related issues. "However, when the United States was a member of the Human Rights Council before, it did not set off much of a storm, and today's Human Rights Council is even less likely to be a platform for the United States to do whatever it wants."
Gao Qiao
Source: People's Daily Overseas Edition