U.S. rights record to be reviewed by the U.N. Human Rights Council

(Note: This is a post I wrote a week ago, so it’s a bit outdated – but still very relevant!)

For the first time ever, the United States will be participating in the universal periodic review (UPR) process of the U.N. Human Rights Council. This council of 47 members was established in March 2006 to replace the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, but includes as members countries such as China, Egypt, Zambia, Cameroon and Cuba, all of which have track records of human rights violations.

Moreover, there have been concerns that the council has condemned Israel’s human rights violations while overlooking some of the human rights violations committed by Middle Eastern countries. The council’s seemingly biased consideration of human rights violations around the globe has destroyed its credibility as an international organization working to enforce human rights.

While President Bush’s administration had refused to join the Human Rights Council due to these concerns, President Obama reversed this decision as part of his effort to improve the U.S.’ relations with the international community.

By participating in the review process, the U.S. will be allowing the 47 members of the Human Rights Council to judge its human rights record. All U.N. member countries are required to go through the UPR process every four years. The Obama administration will submit a 20-page report to the UPR working group, which will choose three member nations at random to review the report.

Supporters of the process have stated that by receiving a good review, the U.S. may have the opportunity to present a stronger front against human rights abusers. The Obama administration has felt that by providing a positive example, the U.S. could improve the work of the human rights council as a whole.

But critics say that by participating, the U.S. will allow human rights violators to judge its record and use the findings to justify their own atrocities. The U.S. may receive unwarranted criticism from countries that seek to condemn the U.S. and its rights record, and that have perpetrated atrocities themselves. By agreeing to the UPR process, the U.S. is essentially granting credibility to an institution that may not be worthy of it.

By submitting itself to the UPR process, will the U.S. reinforce its position as an advocate of human rights, or will it be strongly criticized by other countries with even worse records? From torture at Guantanamo Bay to immigrant detention centers, the U.S. certainly has its fair share of human rights violations; its record is not unblemished. Yet, the Obama administration may not gain much if subject to unwarranted criticisms from countries like China and Egypt. The U.N. Human Rights Council is not likely to improve its discriminatory performance simply through the participation of the U.S. – reform seems to be more likely through sustained advocacy and pressure than through engagement. Only time will tell whether President Obama’s new approach of cooperation will have a transformative effect – or a lackluster one.