01 April 2005
Rights Abusers Do Not Belong on U.N. Rights Panel, U.S. Says, March 31, 2005 (U.N. commission should facilitate progress toward freedom, democracy)
U.S. delegates to the U.N. Commission on Human Rights say that body's country membership must be reformed to prevent those who abuse human rights from using their positions on the committee to prevent criticism of their records.
"These folks get together and prevent, in collusion with one another, resolutions from being offered or being successful against them," said former Senator Rudy Boschwitz, referring to countries like Sudan and Cuba that secure membership in the commission through a selection process based on the United Nations’ regional groups.
"The U.N. Commission on Human Rights, which sits in judgment of the human rights of others, must have some reasonable standards of membership," said Boschwitz, head of the U.S. delegation to the 61st session of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights. "This Commission must be made up of firefighters, not of arsonists," he said.
Boschwitz urged delegates from the commission's 51 member states not to leave Geneva without adopting a strong resolution on the situation in Sudan. "Nor must we leave this place without appropriate condemnation -- unless appropriate condemnations [are] more appropriately done in some other U.N. body -- of other abuses such as Belarus, Burma, Cuba, Iran, North Korea and Zimbabwe."
The commission "must be part of the wave of freedom that is occurring at an accelerating pace worldwide," he added. "It should be a "facilitator of that wave -- not stand in its way or reduce its force."
Boschwitz and other members of the U.S. delegation spoke at a March 31 press conference in Geneva, where the 61st Session of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights is in the midst of its annual six-week session. Over 3,000 delegates representing observer nations and nongovernmental organizations, in addition to the 53 members of the commission, are participating in the session.
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Mark Lagon said the United States finds U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's proposals on the human rights apparatus "very promising," in particular the idea of tying membership to elections in the U.N. General Assembly. But Lagon added that the details of the proposal remain to be worked out and are expected to be the subject of formal discussions at U.N. headquarters in New York.
Lagon said the United States has "many priorities" at the commission, and plans to play a leading role on resolutions designed to continue the United Nations’ human-rights monitoring of the situations in Belarus and Cuba.
The United States also plans to sponsor two "thematic" resolutions designed to promote the development of democratic societies. One focuses on the freedom of assembly and freedom of association, and the other on democracy and the rule of law.
Asked why the United States has not submitted a resolution on China at the 61stsession, Ambassador Kevin E. Moley, permanent representative to the United Nations in Geneva, responded that Beijing has made a number of significant improvements. But he added that the United States has "much higher hopes for the progress of human rights in China," and he did not rule out a resolution as an option in coming years.
Moley questioned the basis for an allegation made at the commission by Special Rapporteur Jean Ziegler that the U.S. invasion of Iraq had led to increased malnutrition among children, terming the statement "unfortunate."
"First he has not visited Iraq. Secondly, he is wrong," Moley said, adding that vaccination rates and food aid have increased dramatically since the fall of Saddam Hussein.
Boschwitz said he saw some evidence that “hopeful” developments in the Middle East are also beginning to also have an impact at the commission.
The former senator said he had been struck by the Palestinian delegates' statement under "Item 8: The Question of the Violation of Human Rights in the Occupied Arab Territories." -- a portion of the commission's annual debate that has normally been reserved for harsh diatribes against Israel. Item 8 is the only agenda item that focuses exclusively on the actions of one country.
The Palestinian delegate's speech "was the shortest and perhaps most meaningful of this entire session," Boschwitz said. "His speech in its entirety was, and I quote, 'We extend our hand to our Israeli neighbors to live in peace.'”
Following is the transcript of the press conference:
(begin transcript)
Press Conference by Senator Rudy Boschwitz
Head of the U.S. Delegation
Ambassador Kevin E. Moley
Permanent Representative to the United Nations & other International Organizations in Geneva
Mark P. Lagon
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for
International Organization Affairs
Thursday, March 31, 2005
United Nations European Headquarters
Geneva, Switzerland
AMBASSADOR MOLEY: Thank you for joining us here this afternoon. Before I introduce our distinguished Head of Delegation, let me just mention a couple of things. One is that, as is traditional with the U.S. delegation, we have three prominent, successful private U.S. citizens who are members of our delegation. This year they are an entrepreneur, Ms. Goli Ameri; a leading lawyer, Leonard Leo; and a business executive from the automotive industry, Lino Piedra. And you will be seeing them here over the course of the entire six weeks of this Commission, and they would be more than glad to give you their views on the Commission and the positions of the United States. They each, as almost every American does, have a very unique story as Americans. And no one has a more interesting story than our Head of Delegation, a distinguished former United States Senator, a U.S. Senator for twelve years from the state of Minnesota. Ten of those years he spent on the Foreign Relations Committee. A dedicated advocate for human rights and someone who we are very proud to have as our head of delegation here for the 61st Commission on Human Rights. So with that, let me turn it over to Senator Rudy Boschwitz. Senator.
SENATOR BOSCHWITZ: Thank you very much, Ambassador. In his second inaugural address earlier this year, President Bush stated that, "it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world." And then he said, "That is indeed the calling of our time."
On releasing a report entitled, "Supporting Human Rights and Democracy, the U.S. record for 2004 and 2005," Secretary of State Rice said last week, and I quote, "One of history's clearest lessons is that our nation is safer and the world more secure, whenever freedom and democracy prevail. The survival of liberty in our land is dependent on the growth of liberty in other lands."
The lesson of history really is very clear because it is an interesting fact of history that there has never been a war between two democracies. We believe, in short, that pursuit of democracy is not only a very noble goal, it is a very practical goal as well.
If the Commission on Human Rights is to aid in this pursuit, in this 61st Session, two things have to happen. Number one, we must not leave here without strengthening last year's weak condemnation of the Sudan, where presently the worst abuses are taking place. Nor must we leave this place without appropriate condemnation -- unless condemnation is more appropriately done in some other U.N. body -- of other abusers, such as Belarus, Burma, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and Zimbabwe.
Secondly, we must express our feelings and intent that this body, the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, which sits in judgment of the human rights of others, must have some reasonable standards of membership.
Freedom House has just put out a booklet entitled, "The Worst of the Worst: The World's Most Repressive Societies in 2005." Twenty countries are listed; seven of them are members of the Commission this year. One was chairman of this Commission two years ago.
This Commission must be made up of firefighters, not of arsonists. And that's really what we see happening here. These folks get together and prevent, in collusion with one another, resolutions from being offered or being successful against them.
This Commission must be part of the wave of freedom that is occurring at an accelerating pace worldwide. The Commission on Human Rights must be a facilitator of that wave -- not stand in its way or reduce its force.
Part of that wave is found in the Middle East, where the most hopeful signs in decades are appearing. I was struck by the Palestinian delegate's speech on Agenda Item 8. His speech was the shortest and perhaps the most meaningful speech of this entire session. His speech in its entirety was, and I quote, "We extend our hands to our Israeli neighbors to live in peace." That was the beginning and that was the end. That was a stunning speech.
The whole tone of the speeches on both sides of the Middle East issue have generally been more moderate. In a later speech the Palestinian delegate talked of living side by side in peace with Israel as Germany does with France. These are very hopeful signs of what is going to happen in the Middle East, perhaps finally.
One can also find hope for the Commission on Human Rights, and indeed for the U.N. as a whole, by the creation and the evolving strength of the democracy caucus. The wave of democracy is really taking off. Freedom House notes that in 1974, there were 41 democracies in the world. And in 2004, that number had grown to 89.
We will work to embolden our fellow democracies so that we can get the kind of resolutions that properly condemn human rights abuses here in the Commission on Human Rights.
I now turn to my colleague Mark Lagon, who is a Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, and he will discuss some of the specifics of what we are going to do.
DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY LAGON: Thank you very much. We have many priorities. Many things are important to the United States, working with other nations here at the Commission on Human Rights. I would just like to focus on four resolutions that we are playing a leading role on, although there are many others on which we will play supporting and enthusiastic roles.
There are two country specific resolutions, where the United States is playing a leading role, and two thematic resolutions. The United States is introducing and offering a resolution on the human rights situation in Cuba. It is designed to extend the mandate of the Personal Representative of the High Commissioner on Human Rights to look at the record of past mandates from the Commission on Human Rights and whether Cuba has been acting upon them.
Secondly, in an increasingly cooperative partnership with the European Union, the United States has been working towards co-tabling a resolution on the human rights situation in Belarus, which would extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur. We hope very much that we can make progress on shedding light on the situation of freedom there.
As far as the two thematic resolutions that are of leading importance to the United States this year, the United States is offering a resolution on freedom of assembly and freedom of association, which relates to many things in terms of journalists, in terms of NGOs, importantly in terms of trade unions, as a crucial pillar of a pluralistic system in which human rights and freedom can flourish.
And then, finally, the United States is working with key partners to co-table a resolution on democracy and the rule of law. Last year we worked with Romania and Peru, among other nations, on a resolution on democracy -- co-tabling it in fact, empowering the High Commissioner on Human Rights to play a larger coordinating role on rule of law and democracy. This year again we are working with Romania and Peru on a resolution on democracy which will emphasize the rule of law and standards for credible elections.
Why don't we leave it at that, because what is most important is to take your questions.
QUESTION: I'd like to have to have views of the delegation on the proposals by Mr. Kofi Annan to reform the present Commission into some form of Human Rights Council and it's an open debate whether it should be the current size, smaller or bigger? My question to you Sir, is I understand the United States favors a smaller body than the present fifty-three member commission, why is that, when the United States is a strong advocate for a universal membership of the World Trade Organization? Thank you.
LAGON: We think the proposals of the Secretary General with regard to the Human Rights apparatus of the U.N. are very promising, whether they be the idea of strengthening the capacity of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and her role with the Security Council, or the idea of a higher status limited-membership body. I will say that the United States does not support the recommendation of the earlier report of the High Level Panel for universal membership of the Commission on Human Rights. We have universal bodies already that deal with human rights. It's a form of resignation not to try and have smaller body work. So we think it's promising and in fact the idea of tying the body perhaps to the General Assembly to have elections there is a constructive one, but we need to look at the details and there will be formal discussion in New York of the proposals.
QUESTION: My questions are related to Latin America. First of all, why is this year the resolution on Cuba going to be presented by you and not by another other Latin American country or the Czech Republic? Did you consult? What happened exactly this year? If you could elaborate on this, and secondly, although you haven't mentioned it, we know that your position regarding the situation in Venezuela is not very favorable. What do you expect from president Chavez in terms of respect to Human Rights, and what can countries of the region, such as Brazil, collaborate in this sense? Thank you.
LAGON: Well, let me just respond first about the Cuba resolution. We have consulted widely with other nations. There are other nations who had an interest in working or playing a leading role on this resolution. It's a clear situation on the state of human rights in Cuba with the political prisoners who remain in jail, who were locked up two years ago. The United States is known to be an ardent advocate of the passage of the Cuban resolution. We're offering it ourselves this year, despite some European partners and some Latin partners who are willing and interested themselves in doing it. And we expect a number of them to be enthusiastic co-sponsors.
As far as Venezuela goes, the United States is very concerned about the situation in Venezuela, a slide from democracy. In truth, in using the trappings of democracy in form, this Commission should be concerned about that situation as many others. But to address your question, the OAS, the partners of the Western hemisphere have very rich institutions that they should use to help put a spotlight on the backsliding of freedom and democracy in Venezuela. The Inter-American Democratic Charter, which was in fact signed on the very day of September 11th, is one of the international community's greatest legacies, and the democratic partners should work together to try and assist Venezuelans in reclaiming the path of democracy.
QUESTION: I just have a question to anybody on the panel. Mr. Jean Ziegler, the rapporteur on food, said this morning that the severe malnutrition of children in Iraq is ... that the United States military policy is responsible for that. He was quoting American reports since the war. So could I have any reaction to that from the American side?
MOLEY: Yes, we noted the unfortunate comments of rapporteur Ziegler. First, he has not visited Iraq. Secondly, he is wrong. And third, I'd like to just give some background in the sense that the malnutrition rates that have been reported despite the difficulties of reporting in Iraq, have varied widely over the last fifteen years. And the surveys that have been taken, which of course have been done under difficult circumstances, have indicated that the recent rise in malnutrition rates began between 2002 and 2003, under the regime of Saddam Hussein. But having said that, they have varied widely, given the difficulties of conducting surveys. They've ranged from 11 percent in 1996, as an example, of 7.8 percent in the year 2000, and malnutrition rates throughout the Arab world are actually higher than the one that is purported to be accurate by Jean Ziegler in Iraq. So he's taking some information that is in itself is difficult to de-validate and juxtaposing his own views which are widely known, widely known, his views about the war in Iraq, and suggesting that the two are linked. If anything, vaccination rates, food aid, which is only made possible, by the way, by the Oil for Food program -- which we all know was ripped off by Saddam Hussein and others -- has improved dramatically since the fall of Saddam Hussein. So we wish very much that John Ziegler in all his reporting would stick to the facts, but in his case that would leave him little to say.
QUESTION: A question for the Senator. Senator, the Mexicans are putting forward a resolution to create a three year mandate for a rapporteur to look into human rights and the war against terrorism. I was wondering what you think of this, and secondly, you mentioned Sudan as one of your priorities. But the Sudan is being dealt with by the African group who've made it clear they are not willing to condemn one of their own. Why was the Sudan resolution not sponsored by another country, like yours, for example?
LAGON: We worked with the Mexicans last year and a number of other nations on a resolution that relates to the conduct of counter-terrorism and the protection of human rights, supported an Independent Expert, and will work with other nations on looking into what mechanism follows. There's intensive discussion throughout the U.N. system about the protection of human rights in counter-terrorism, and the United States is quite committed to it. But we'll get into the details and discussions, we've only today seen the text, the discussions over that text from the Mexicans are only just beginning.
BOSCHWITZ: With respect to Sudan, I believe that the Europeans have wanted to move that forward, so that was satisfactory with us, and in our hope we will push them along and then try to embolden them so the same thing doesn't happen as happened last year. Ambassador Moley, would you comment on it?
MOLEY: Sure, we have high hopes that there will be a resolution on the Sudan. It obviously is an area where there are severe human rights violations taking place. There are discussions going on between the African Union and the European Union, as the Senator has indicated. Unfortunately we might recall that last year at the very end of the Commission, after, and only after, Secretary General Kofi Annan, had come here directly to Geneva, and spoken of the gross human rights violations taking place, did a discussion take place between the African Union and the European Union, without the United States, and it produced a proposal for resolution that quite frankly was very, very unsatisfactory. We are hopeful, given what has happened, meaning the continued human rights abuses over the course of the last year, that the African Union will come forward with something that is meaningful, and if they don't, we will have to review the situation and make a determination as to what the United States of America will do, either here or in New York.
BOSCHWITZ: And if we expect something to pass here it just is better and wiser to allow the African Union to first make a proposal and then the Europeans want to have their word on that too, and it's my hope that in the event that the proposal the African Union makes is not strong enough, that the Europeans will strengthen it. And if not we will certainly take action.
QUESTION: Two questions about your government's position on the two core ... international human rights treaties. Why hasn't the U.S. hasn't ratified the international covenant on economic, social and cultural rights, which your government signed in 87, I believe? And secondly, why hasn't your government handed in the report on the implementation of the international covenant on civil and political rights, which I believe is more than five years overdue? Thanks.
LAGON: The United States has well known views about human rights and the primacy of political and civil liberties as the core of human rights. There are elements of federalism here and we have a federal system in which the federal government cannot commit for the fifty states on a number of legal things. There are elements of the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights that stand in the way of likely ratification, but we remain committed to much of the core premises that everyone should have equal opportunity, there should be economic prosperity and in fact, we're working very hard in this body and other U.N. bodies to promote the idea that rule of law, transparency, pluralism are enablers for economic prosperity.
Now, with respect to the report that's late, yes, indeed, it is late. A number of the western countries, a number of countries from different parts of the world have failed to turn in reports on time. We're working to prepare the report and will be turning it in very soon, grappling with all aspects of domestic implementation of the ICCPR. We expect that the Human Rights Committee will be reviewing it and we will have an oral presentation and an oral examination of our record, as soon as we're done with the report.
QUESTION: Something that we have heard, the press has heard, a lot from human rights organizations at the start of this commission is a concern about a kind of rowing back from the complete prohibition on torture under international law, and a question of when evidence could be admitted, gained under torture, in what cases. I just wonder if you could give me the official U.S. administration position on that?
MOLEY: We have made it clear beyond a shadow of a doubt from the highest levels of the United States government, from the President of the United States, from his own mouth, in several occasions, we are against torture. We do not condone torture. If anyone in the United States government is discovered to have violated that prohibition they will be brought to justice.
QUESTION: The evidence?
MOLEY: That is about as clear as I can be, and it's as clear as the President has been.
QUESTION: The evidence question, the admissibility of evidence I'm interested in as well.
MOLEY: I don't understand.
QUESTION: When is evidence -- if ever -- admissible, if it has been gained under torture.
MOLEY: Well, considered the fact that we have a strong prohibition against torture, that question is not relevant.
QUESTION: This year you will not present a resolution on China. Do you think that the situation of human rights is better now in China than in Cuba. What's about the right of the Chinese democrats. What about the rights of the militants of the Falun Gong, about the Tibetans, about the young Panchen Lama who is a child and still in jail, the youngest prisoner of conscience in the world?
AMBASSADOR MOLEY: Thank you for your question. You are right we have decided not to submit a resolution on China this year. As you may recall, we did submit a resolution last year when our discussions with the Chinese government on certain actions we wished them to take to improve the human rights situation broke down. We had been in discussion with the Chinese government about specifics items which we have an interest in improving their situation. The most notable, of course, the one that has been most reported, was the release of Rebiya Kadeer, the Uighur Muslim business woman, which was one of the pre-conditions. But there were a number of others which as important as it was to gain her release, are more far reaching in terms of what they have promised, and what we will hold them to, as we go forward in looking at whether or not the U.S. will or will not have resolutions on human rights in China. As an example, giving prisoners convicted of political crimes the same rights to sentence reductions and paroles as are available to other prisoners. The agreement to host a visit by the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, a public policy statement that clarifies that religious education of minors is consistent with Chinese law and policy. The recent announcement of the opening of an office of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Beijing by June which we will be closely following . An agreement to issue an invitation of the Special Rapporteur on Religious Intolerance. The previous visit on last November, of the Special Rapporteur on Arbitrary Detention, the issuance of new regulations providing that family churches, in which members worship at home with friends and relatives, do not need to register with the government. An invitation to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom to visit China. These reflect an improvement. They do not represent all that we would like to see by any means. We have much higher hopes for progress of human rights in China. But unlike in Cuba, which you mentioned, which like some other countries in the Human Rights Commission, actively aids, abets and conducts human rights violations, we, at least in China, are finding a dialogue in which they are responding to the international community. Not as quickly as we would like, not as much as we would like, but certainly they are demonstrating progress and we would like to encourage that. We wish we saw that in other countries that are the worst of the worst as the Senator mentioned.
BOSCHWITZ: All of these were points, each point that the Ambassador made, of what the new agreement was, and reasons why we didn't bring this particular resolution. Additionally, there was an agreement for a visit by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights starting on August 29th of this year. So, they were quite forthcoming and we indeed made some forward progress and that doesn't mean our bilateral talks will not continue. Quite the opposite they will, and we will seek more progress.
QUESTION: Mr. Senator, are you concerned that in the future Human Rights Council the arsonists will continue to be the members and how would you prevent that from happening?
LAGON: You may want to follow up. He is asking whether we're worried that in new arrangement proposed by the Secretary General on the reform of the Commission new configuration with the Human Rights Council that one might still have the problem of there being arsonists rather than firefighters, in the nice turn of phrase by the Senator.
That of course is exactly where the discussion about the Human Rights Council has to fall. What precisely does it mean when the Secretary General proposes that there should be a two third majority vote necessary for electing members of a Human Rights Council. As the expression goes, the devil is in the details. If one continues to have a system in which regional blocks can determine a slate and put up the candidates themselves as exists in the Commission on Human Rights so that, for instance, we have the situation of Sudan being returned to the membership of the Commission on Human Rights in the election last spring, then two-thirds vote doesn't matter. But is the arrangements are such that the body of nations who are free, or who are decent, can actually use the vote so that a new human rights body has credible members then we will be moving forward, and that discussion has to happen among the member states in New York.
BOSCHWITZ: The Commission on Human Rights is held in low regard simply because of what the Secretary says -- that the membership of the Commission obviously are not the firefighters but rather the arsonists. That has to stop if this Commission is going to play a meaningful role in the development of democracy in the world and if it's going to be a Commission that is held in high regard.
QUESTION: Mr. Clinton wrote an article and he said that the Syrian Government killed Rafiq Hariri. I would like to know if you share this opinion -- does the Bush Administration share this opinion?
MOLEY: There has been a UN investigation, as you know, of the assassination of Rafiq Hariri which, I believe, opens the question of Syrian involvement. But we will await further details on that. That will not be coming from the Human Rights Commission, that will be coming, if at all, from the State Department in Washington.
QUESTION: If the report proves that the Syrian did indeed kill Hariri, do you think that you are going to bring them in front of the Human Rights Commission next year?
MOLEY: I think that's hypothetical question and we would not be prepared to want to answer.
BOSCHWITZ: But your question does suggest the very unhealthy situation that exists in Lebanon with the occupation by 20,000 or 30,000 Syrian troops, together with a large number of intelligence operatives. So, hopefully that will clarify itself, and the people of Lebanon seem to be speaking quite clearly what their desires are in these matters.
QUESTION: Senator, you mentioned that you want to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur for Cuba. Each year the Special Rapporteur mentions or cites the U.S economic blockade on Cuba as the key contributor to the dilemma there. I was wondering what more you would expect if you were to extend the mandate. Do you expect it to be different in the future? My second question refers to last year vote of the General Assembly where the American economic blockade was condemned by a vote of 179 to 4. I wanted to ask, do you find it frustrating that the rest of the world doesn't seem to share your views on Cuba.
BOSCHWITZ: I believe that the Secretary has spoken about that item so I let him continue.
LAGON: Well, to clarify, it is the Personal Representative of the High Commissioner that is the mechanism in this resolution. And yes, there are references to the U.S. embargo. If you look at the facts, the U.S. embargo has an exception for food and medicine. In fact there is a humanitarian exception to the embargo. So the facts that are raised in this allegation are not grounded.
There is also an inaccuracy in suggesting that it's a blockade. It's a bilateral matter. It's not something that is implemented militarily; it's not something that is conducted multilaterally. It's a bilateral policy. The United States has a sovereign right to conduct its commercial affairs and it has pretty good record considering the fact that there was a humanitarian exception established for the embargo.
QUESTION: Coming back to your expose and on the good things in China, Mr. Ambassador, I was wondering if you have any speaking notes there on the response you got from Beijing, the fact that Beijing is sending back North Koreans who have fled North Korea, some of them to death squads? Thank you.
AMBASSADOR MOLEY: John, I think I made it clear that we are not altogether happy with the human rights situation in China. To the contrary, we have serious concerns about human rights in China which led us to run a resolution last year which you may recall was overwhelmingly defeated by the membership of this Commission. We made it clear that we were prepared to run a resolution again this year unless there was certain progress made in certain areas. Does that suggest that we are entirely pleased with the human rights record in China? Is there a fundamental change in China? Obviously not. And I state that, and the United States Government states that, unequivocally. We are looking for more progress in China. And there needs to be significant progress in China, or we will take measures either here or in New York to reflect our displeasure. But in this situation, specifically, they did as the Senator has noted and as I have noted, based on discussions we had with them over a period of time, accede to certain conditions that we are satisfied with at this point.
QUESTION: My question was, what exactly did the Chinese, did they make any commitments vis-à-vis the North Korean refugees, in your bilaterals in Beijing?
MOLEY: I don't believe it was an issue in the bilaterals in Beijing.
QUESTION: In your bilaterals on human rights in Beijing, did you raise the question of the North Korean refugees?
AMBASSADOR MOLEY: John, we raise the question of North Korea with China all the time.
QUESTION: For Mr. Lagon, since you mentioned Venezuela and the situation there, if it continues like this do you envisage having discussion about Venezuela next year at the Commission on Human Rights here? And by the way, since we are talking about it, how do you see the fact that with all this description you made about Venezuela the Spanish government yesterday closed a deal of one billion dollars of arms sale to Venezuela?
LAGON: Well, you know it's the judgment of the U.S. Government that many of the steps by Hugo Chavez, in his governance and in his diplomacy, are destabilizing. They are destabilizing to democracy in his own country and destabilizing in other countries. We'll have to assess the situation but the human rights bodies of the UN should monitor Venezuela because, alas, despite the wave of freedom that Senator Boschwitz discussed, there are ebbs. There are examples of backsliding. And the democracies of the world and the democracies of the hemisphere, need to work to lend a helping hand in those cases where there is that ebb, that backsliding.
QUESTION: A number of NGOs who are saying that a number of countries contribute to discrediting the Commission, not only the countries you mentioned in the beginning Senator, but also the United States because of the treatment given to the prisoners in Guantanamo. I was wondering what was your response to that criticism?
BOSCHWITZ: Well Ambassador Moley has responded earlier about prisoners and I will let him continue.
MOLEY: Thank you Senator. This year at the Human Rights Commission we took the opportunity of the Human Rights Commission to bring the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Matt Waxman to the Commission to speak to groups on the subject of the detainees at Guantanamo. I think it's interesting to note that the only prison on the island of Cuba which allows the International Committee of the Red Cross to visit, is at Guantanamo. The only prison on the island of Cuba where the International Committee of the Red Cross is able to visit is at Guantanamo.
Having said that, the United States, as we have said before is deeply embarrassed and even, yes, shamed of the activities that took place at Abu Ghraib in respect to the abuse of detainees and there are over hundred cases of United States service men and women who have been held accountable and some of whom are even at this point in jail themselves for the abuses that took place. We have ongoing legal procedures. We have put in place additional regulations to assure that these abuses do not take place again.
So, although, as I said, we are embarrassed by what has occurred, even ashamed by the activities of some, they do not reflect the law, the spirit, or the intent of the United States Government and to the degree that those laws and regulations have been abused, the perpetrators will in fact be punished.
QUESTION: Senator , I would like to go back again to your opening comments. What do you think of the fact that there are no resolutions anywhere either on Chechnya or on Iran.
BOSCHWITZ: Chechnya would be Russia. We certainly deplore the abuses that have occurred in both those countries, abuses on both sides, in the case of Chechnya. We have considered and talked about Iran. We agree that there are some blatant violations of human rights in both those places and the UN should address them.
LAGON: If I may follow up. The UN has taken action on Iran. We hail the leadership played by Canada as a partner of the United States on resolutions that have passed two year in a row in the UN General Assembly and that's important. UN bodies need to speak to the situation in Iran where the theocratic wing of the government has denied the ability of candidates to run for office and a number of other abuses have taken place. And the United States will speak to issues in countries where there are human rights abuses whether or not Item 9 resolutions are offered. In terms of other partners of the United States, the European Union has taken the lead in the past in looking at resolutions related to the situation in Chechnya. This year it has elected not to pursue such resolution, but there is a vigorous effort by our President, our Secretary of State, to engage the Government of Russia on the situation of human rights and of democratic institutions in the country since there are troubling signs, both in the treatment of civilians in Chechnya and in basic, fundamental, civic liberties throughout Russia.
AMBASSADOR MOLEY: Thank you very much. We appreciate your coming.
(end transcript)
