On May 9, the UN General Assembly elected members from 47 nations to oversee the Human Rights Council. The newly created council replaced the Human Rights Commission, and its first meeting took place on June 19 in Geneva.
International human rights groups are very concerned about whether the council will be able to carry out its tasks free from political interference or manipulation by states known to be human rights abusers.
Prior to the council elections, incidents involving certain countries opposed to seeing rights abusers on the council underscored what a political hot potato the new body is. While the US announced it would boycott the council elections, Human Rights Watch criticized the General Assembly's move to elect China, Cuba, Russia, Pakistan, Azerbaijan, Saudi Arabia and Iran to the council.
The US believed that the membership criteria for the council were too lax and failed to screen out rights abusers, since the backing of only half of the 191 UN member states is needed to join the council. The US wanted to raise the bar by requiring council applicants to win the support of two-thirds of the UN's membership.
It was truly a pity that other UN members ignored the US' recommendation. The result was that 22 of the 47 countries elected to the council are listed by Freedom House as "not free" or "partly free" nations.
Among the "not free" are China, Algeria, Tunisia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Cameroon and Cuba. "Partly free" members include Morocco, Nigeria, Zambia, Bangladesh, Jordan, Malaysia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Ecuador and Guatemala.
So close to one-half of the council members are regarded by international human rights groups as rights abusers. Whether the council can carry out its mandate and avoid manipulation or interference by rights-abusing nations will determine its success or failure in the eyes of the international community.
Chen Lung-chu is chairman of the New Century Foundation and director of the Taiwan United Nations Alliance.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS