THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION. Since the creation of the United Nations Human Rights Commission in 1947, the United States had always been approved as one of its members.

Since the Reagan administration, United States policy was to define human rights in terms of civil and political rights -- but to dismiss economic, social, and cultural rights as akin to social welfare, or socialism. (AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

The United States objected to the Commission’s proposals that included a commitment to the protection of economic, social and cultural rights. The refusal to espouse rights such as employment, education, food, housing, and health care in United States law was the reason the United States refused to ratify the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. (AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

In May 2001, the United States, a founding member of the Commission on Human Rights, was voted off the international panel since it was formed in 1947. Bush was furious. Many countries were angry with the United States for its policies in the Middle East, and its opposition to the International Criminal Court, the treaty to ban land mines, the Kyoto Protocol, and making AIDS drugs available to everyone. (New York Times, May 4, 2001; AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

The following year, the Bush administration failed to negotiate a way back onto the Commission. As a result of behind the scenes negotiations among Western nations, a new proposal was adopted. It provided that the members of the Council would serve for a period of three years and would not be eligible for immediate re-election after two consecutive terms. (AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

This was objectionable to the Bush administration, which wanted to guarantee a spot on the Council for the five permanent members of the Security Council - France, Britain, Russia, China, and the United States. (AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

The Bush administration criticized the Human Rights Commission, since elected members included Sudan, Zimbabwe, Libya, Iran, and Cuba. Nothing, of course, was said about the Bush administration’s dismal human rights track record.

Sudan was accused of violating human rights, most notably its reputation for refusing to end the country’s slavery dilemma.

Sierra Leone suffered massive human rights violations in its 10-year civil war, some of them committed by forces loyal to the government.

Togo was the target of a United Nations investigation on human rights abuse.

Ugandan restricted political opposition in its single-party system.

Libya not only became a new member in 2003 but its ambassador, Najat Al-Hajjaji, was chosen the commission’s chairman by a vote of 33-to-3 with 17 members abstaining. New York Times, May 4, 2001; BBC, January 20, 2003)

John Bolton was named the United States ambassador to the United Nations in 2005, but only as the result of a recess-appointment by Bush. The Bush administration attempted to block the Human Rights Commission at every turn. (AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

The United States was one of a few countries to oppose two of the Commission’s proposals in 2005:

1. The Bush administration opposed a proposal to affirm that the right to development was equal to the rights to peace and security, and human rights -- as the three pillars of the United Nations system. (AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

2. The United States and Australia were the only nations to vote against a General Assembly resolution on the Right to Development, which was passed by a vote of 48 to 2, with 2 abstentions. It reaffirmed the principle that the right to development was an “inalienable human right.” (AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

The Bush administration lobbied for open voting on Council membership instead of the secret ballot elections that the proposal called for. The White House wanted to make it easier to blackmail smaller nations for their votes. (AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

ACCUSING THE UNITED STATES OF HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES. In 2001, Bush marched off to war against Afghanistan, and in 2003 he invaded Iraq. During these two wars, evidence continued to surface that the Bush administration was engaged in torture during the interrogation of suspects and thus was in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

The Human Rights Commission repeatedly asked the Bush administration for explanations about deaths in detention. United Nations official Asma Jahangir wrote to the United States and Great Britain of her concern over deaths in custody and extra-judicial killings. (BBC, May 12, 2004)

Jahangir wrote to the United States ambassador and to the United Nations in Geneva. She expressed deep concern over reports of deaths in custody as a result of what she described as degrading and humiliating forms of torture. She also wrote to the United States ambassador three times on this subject. She asked the United States to supply her with a complete list of all cases of suspected deaths in custody in Iraq and details of investigations carried out into them. (BBC, May 12, 2004)

However, the 2004 annual United States Human Rights report told another story. The report overlooked the abuses that were either directly or indirectly condoned by the Bush administration. Instead, it said: “The United States pledged to continue to push for improved human rights, including halting torture and promoting freedom of the press and religion.” (New York Times, May 20, 2004)

Finally in 2005, the Commission took aggressive action against the Bush administration. Each time, however, the White House immediately stonewalled any further action:

1. In the spring of 2005, the United States refused a request by Jean Ziegler. The United Nations Human Rights Commission’s Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food asked to meet with State Department officials to discuss the impact the United States embargo on Cuba was having on the Cuban people’s right to food. (AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

2. In late 2005, Ziegler reported that both Coalition Forces and the insurgents in Iraq “have adopted the cutting of food and water supplies to cities under attack.” Ziegler noted that “the starvation of civilians as a method of warfare is prohibited in both international and non-international armed conflict.” He cited the Protocols to the Geneva Conventions. (AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

3. The Bush administration pressured the Commission to withdraw Professor Cherif Bassiouni, the Commission’s Independent Expert on Human Rights in Afghanistan, from his mission after he issued a report critical of the United States. Bassiouni accused United States troops of breaking into homes, arbitrarily arresting residents and torturing detainees.

Bassiouni also alleged that United States-led forces had committed “sexual abuse, beatings, torture and use of force resulting in death.” He wrote, “When these forces directly engage in practices that violate ... international human rights and international humanitarian law, they undermine the national project of establishing a legal basis for the use of force.” Bassiouni later said, “The United States and the coalition forces consider themselves above and beyond the reach of the law.” (AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

While accusations of human rights abuses leveled at the Bush administration, the hypocritical Bolton said in February 2006: “We consider the United States a champion of human rights. It is a fundamental and bedrock tenet upon which our country was founded. Thus, when the United States falls short of the high standards we set for ourselves, we move swiftly and decisively to vigorously prosecute offenders who are United States citizens in our courts.” (AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL. In early 2006, discussions were held to create the HRC. The White House backed a proposal under which the five veto-wielding permanent members of the Security Council -- the United States, Britain, France, China, and Russia -- would be “permanent members” of the HRC. (Inter Press Service, April 7, 2006)

But the attempt to ensure “guaranteed seating” for the Big Five was rejected by an overwhelming majority of members, even though the five permanent members found permanent seats in another newly created United Nations body: the Peace-building Commission. (Inter Press Service, April 7, 2006)

As a result, Bush knew that other nations would not endorse the United States because of accusations of using torture. Consequently, the administration backed out of the race for membership, presumably knowing that it would not be accepted because of its disregard for human rights. (Inter Press Service, April 7, 2006)

The resentment against the Bush administration was so intense that many of the members who publicly pledged their votes to the United States reneged on their promises privately -- and got away with it in a secret-ballot vote. (Inter Press Service, April 7, 2006)

In the spring of 2006, the Human Rights Commission voted to rename it the Human Rights Council. This came after months of negotiations between the 53-member nations of the Commission. In April, the General Assembly voted to disband the Human Rights Commission.

Bolton immediately denounced the compromise, saying it had too many “deficiencies” and should be renegotiated. He added, “Membership on the Commission by some of the world’s most notorious human rights abusers mocks the legitimacy of the Commission and the United Nations itself.” But Bolton was not referring to the United States. (Human Rights Hypocrisy, February 27, 2006; AlterNet, March 1, 2006)

THE STATE DEPARTMENT’S REPORT ON HUMAN RIGHTS.

In March 2006, the State Department released its report on human rights:

1. The introduction called particular attention to six countries where restrictions on rights were said to be severe: China, Cuba, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, and Zimbabwe.

2. Repression in China increased in 2005, with a trend toward “increased harassment, detention, and imprisonment” of people seen as threats to the government.

3. Extreme violence occurred in Iraq where people were killed for political and other reasons. The report said, “Reports increased of killings by the government or its agents that may have been politically motivated.” That assessment was more glaring than the 2004 report that praised Iraq’s political advances toward a permanent democratic government.

4. Egypt and Saudi Arabia were both given a poor record overall. The report noted reports of torture and abuse of prisoners and detainees, including deaths in custody: The report said: “Torture and abuse of prisoners and detainees by police, security personnel and prison guards remained common and persistent.” The State Department also noted beatings, arbitrary arrest, and lack of religious freedom in Saudi Arabia.

5. The United Arab Emirates was considered a “problematic” nation. The report noted floggings as punishment for adultery or drug abuse. (Washington Post, March 8, 2006)