[DEBATE] : (Fwd) SA in the UN: anti-Human Rights under guise of anti-West

[Patrick Bond]

sunday times
SA now skunk of the world
ROWAN PHILP: London Published:Nov 18, 2007


South Africa’s human rights reputation is in tatters after a series of 
“sell-out” votes at the UN on issues ranging from rape and gay rights to 
tyranny.

This week the watchdog UNWatch ranked South Africa last, alongside 
China, Russia, Pakistan, Algeria and Saudi Arabia, on a human rights list.

Human rights organisations have branded Pretoria “the chief human rights 
villain”.

SA is accused of

# shielding Sudan, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Cuba, the Democratic Republic of 
Congo and Myanmar.

# opposing a resolution on human rights abuses in Darfur in November 
2006 — choosing instead to praise Sudan’s “co-operation”;

# opposing a motion for the Security Council to hear a briefing on the 
crisis in Zimbabwe in March this year;

# helping to bar two major gay rights organisations from being 
accredited at the UN in July;

# helping to remove all United Nations scrutiny of human rights abuses 
in Belarus and Cuba — the “worst rights abusers in Europe and the 
Americas” in June; and

# opposing a Security Council briefing on human rights abuses in the DRC 
in June.

Last week, the country led the blocking of a resolution condemning the 
use of rape as a weapon of war, saying it wanted more than just this 
form of rape condemned.

Human Rights Watch’s Steve Crawshaw said this was the “last straw”.

But Foreign Affai rs Director- General Ayanda Ntsaluba said some 
resolutions were designed to promote Western agendas. “A mockery is made 
of human rights, with the impression created that certain human rights 
violations are tolerable because they are committed in some countries.”

South Africa’s ambassador to the UN, Dumisani Kumalo, accused the US of 
“whipping up the media, trying to make South Africa look bad”.

But UNWatch executive director Hillel Neuer said South Africa and India 
were “the biggest disappointments among free democracies”.

“Its [SA’s] reputation has gone from pro-human rights to purely 
anti-Western,” he said.

Thomas Wheeler, of the SA Institute of International Affairs, said South 
Africa had “lost the moral high ground ”.

But political analyst Adam Habib said South Africa had been right to 
oppose the “hidden political agendas of the Western powers”, although by 
failing to “go on to take the lead on those issues ... our reputation 
has taken a hit.”

***

SA GOVERNMENT

Response to Sunday Times

The promotion and protection of human rights remains one of the pillars 
of South Africa´s foreign policy.
This is an approach derived from our constitution and the bill of rights.
We express this practically in both our bilateral and multilateral 
engagements.
Bilaterally we engage directly with countries and express our concerns 
where we feel that human rights are being violated.
In the multilateral arena South Africa has always been among the leading 
countries behind the reform and strengthening of the UN´s human rights 
machinery.
As a manifestation of this South Africa chaired the negotiations that 
led to the creation of the new UN Human Rights Council.
We supported the creation of the Human Rights Council because we saw it 
as a body with the potential to re-energize the UN´s human rights 
machinery and improve its credibility.
The UN´s human rights machinery over the years lost its credibility due 
to the problems of double standards, selectivity and politicization.
By double standards we mean that it only addressed itself with human 
rights problems in some and not in other countries. Historically the UN 
resolutions on human rights have always targeted mainly the developing 
countries. No resolutions are ever brought and passed to address human 
rights situations in developed countries or global human rights problems 
created by developed countries. This is a fact that organizations such 
as UN Watch, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International know too well.
Because of this a mockery is made of human rights with the impression 
created that certain human rights violations are tolerable because they 
are committed in some countries.
By politicization we mean that a number of the resolutions are presented 
at the United Nations to address bilateral political problems. Indeed 
when these bilateral political problems are resolved such resolutions 
are no longer presented. This is a fact which organizations such as UN 
Watch, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International know too well.
The whole membership of the United Nations therefore recognized these 
problems and supported the creation of the Human Rights Council and 
South Africa is pleased to have played a role in its creation.
There are two broad categories of human rights recognized at the 
international level: civil and political rights; and social and economic 
rights.
While many western countries and western NGOs are only concerned about 
civil and political rights, South Africa on the other hand and many 
other countries are concerned about all human rights - civil and 
political; and social and economic.
The ranking by UN Watch is therefore blatantly lopsided because it 
creates the impression that the international community is only 
concerned about civil and political rights, and therefore the country 
situations.
We wish to put it on record that the country situations mentioned by UN 
Watch are only one agenda item under ten agenda items addressed by the 
Human Rights Council under the two broad categories mentioned above.
Had the UN Watch rankings been based on a holistic and comprehensive 
assessment of country positions, based on all the agenda items of the 
Human Rights Council, surely South Africa does way better than many 
other countries.
We also hope that the Sunday Times would look critically at some of 
these organizations before giving them undue credence. It should be 
recalled that UN Watch is one organization that is actively campaigning 
to undermine a key South African initiative at the global level, the 
World Conference Against Racism. While the world is grappling with and 
trying to find solutions to the problems of racial hatred and 
intolerance UN Watch posts articles on its website describing the 
conference as a “global festival of hatred”. It is therefore important 
that while quoting these organizations the Sunday Times should also 
inform its readers about the extent of their agenda.
Sunday Times might therefore also wish to qualify its description of 
these organizations as the “world´s biggest human rights organizations”.
South Africa shall never apologise for insisting on the careful division 
of labour between the organs of the United Nations. As we entrench good 
governance at home we insist on the same principles in the multilateral 
system.
The fact that Professor Gambari is able to register some progress in his 
interventions on Myanmar is testimony to the need for the international 
community to avoid political expediency and utilize the correct tools to 
address global problems.
The UN should also not be just about condemning human rights violations 
but should also seek to do something concrete about it. This was the 
spirit in which the human rights council was borne – that instead of the 
old system it would also focus on helping countries concretely to 
address their problems. It is a fact, however, that for some countries 
and non-governmental organizations, it is still business as usual.