The United States, with its human rights record under attack, has said it will not run for a seat on the new UN Human Rights Council.
| Good idea. Let Sudan have it. |
Some human rights experts say US abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and its treatment of detainees at the Guantanamo Bay prison in Cuba, may have made it hard for Washington to win election to the council. Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, said it was "childish" for Washington not to run for a seat, even though it risked the embarrassment of possible failure. "It's unfortunate that the Bush administration's disturbing human rights record means that the United States would hardly have been a shoo-in for election to the council.
| We're busy doing things that are unpleasant, so that nitwits like Kenneth Roth can continue their lucrative ankle-biting careers. Guantanamo doesn't bother me a bit. Abu Ghraib was perpetrated by low-IQ sadists who're now in jug. HRW spends a lot of time criticizing the mote in our eye, while ignoring the beam in others'. |
"Today's decision not to run seems like an effort to make a virtue of necessity," he said. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack explained Thursday's decision this way: Many democracies with strong human rights records had already put themselves forward for the May 9 election and "it's only fair that they have the opportunity to run for a seat on a council for which they have voted". The US would probably seek a seat on the 47-member council next year, but would meanwhile support the council financially and encourage it to address human rights abuses in Iran, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Myanmar, Sudan and North Korea, McCormack added. |