The Ambassador to the United Nations for the United States, Nikki Haley and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, announced in a joint statement on Tuesday that the U.S. was leaving the U.N. Human Rights Council.
The full text can be found at the State Department website:
On one of their points, the matter of bias against Israel, the statement was excellent:
And then, of course, there is the matter of the chronic bias against Israel. Last year, the United States made it clear that we would not accept the continued existence of agenda item seven, which singles out Israel in a way that no other country is singled out. Earlier this year, as it has in previous years, the Human Rights Council passed five resolutions against Israel – more than the number passed against North Korea, Iran, and Syria combined. This disproportionate focus and unending hostility towards Israel is clear proof that the council is motivated by political bias, not by human rights.
That part inspired immediate and strong praise from Israel for the move:
Israel thanks President Trump, Secretary Pompeo and Ambassador Haley for their courageous decision against the hypocrisy and the lies of the so-called UN Human Rights Council.
— Benjamin Netanyahu (@netanyahu) June 19, 2018
Had that been the only reason for the departure, it would have been strong and valid. It was not. Others were given. The introductory paragraph set the tone:
Good afternoon. The Trump administration is committed to protecting and promoting the God-given dignity and freedom of every human being. Every individual has rights that are inherent and inviolable. They are given by God, and not by government. Because of that, no government must take them away.
It continued with excerpts such as:
President Trump wants to move the ball forward. From day one, he has called out institutions or countries who say one thing and do another.
Based on Justin’s false statements at his news conference, and the fact that Canada is charging massive Tariffs to our U.S. farmers, workers and companies, I have instructed our U.S. Reps not to endorse the Communique as we look at Tariffs on automobiles flooding the U.S. Market!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 9, 2018
The only thing worse than a council that does almost nothing to protect human rights is a council that covers for human rights abuses and is therefore an obstacle to progress and an impediment to change.
Trump told G-7 leaders over dinner last Friday in Quebec that Crimea is Russian because everyone who lives there speaks Russian—the defense Putin has given for Russia's invasion and annexation of Crimea in 2014. https://t.co/nMNwclK51o
— Rebecca Ballhaus (@rebeccaballhaus) June 14, 2018
For too long, the Human Rights Council has been a protector of human rights abusers and a cesspool of political bias.
If President Trump praising Duterte wasn't enough, the dictator literally just sang Trump a love song pic.twitter.com/jc4zayntKe
— NowThis (@nowthisnews) November 13, 2017
The world’s most inhumane regimes continue to escape scrutiny, and the council continues politicizing and scapegoating of countries with positive human rights records in an attempt to distract from the abusers in their ranks.
In an interview with @FoxNews, Brett Baier asks Trump about Kim Jong Un's atrocious human rights violations.
Trump responded by calling Kim "tough" and "very smart," and then said:
"A lot of other people have done some really bad things." pic.twitter.com/ZLQMnT4FwX— Caroline O. (@RVAwonk) June 13, 2018
and
Look at the council membership and you see an appalling disrespect for the most basic human rights. These countries strongly resist any effort to expose their abusive practices.
Immigrant children — some barely old enough to walk, some infants still in their mothers’ arms — being torn away from their undocumented parents as they try to cross the border. More than 2,000 children have been seized by border authorities in the last six weeks alone.
— Abp. José H. Gomez (@ArchbishopGomez) June 19, 2018
This statement was carefully prepared and vetted. The inclusion of any one of those statements is problematic. The inclusion of all of them is politically tone deaf.
Make no mistake: the UN Security Council is not doing what it was set up to do, and the U.S. has a valid argument for leaving it. But we should not do so in a way that marginalizes our authority, and that is what happened, because those statements emphasize very questionable decisions and statements by our national leadership.
