Mr. Chairman, Members of the Foreign Relations Committee,
It is an honor to be here to discuss the Bush Administration's
democracy promotion and human rights policy and the importance of
maintaining our leadership in this field. This is my first chance
to address this committee since I became the Under Secretary of
State for Global Affairs. I look forward to future discussions
with you on these important issues. My purpose today is to
highlight the Bush Administration's commitment to democracy and
human rights promotion and the policies we intend to pursue in
support of them.
U.S. commitment to human rights dates from the Declaration of
Independence and our nation's founding. This reflects our
nation's values and our deeply rooted belief in the importance of
developing and maintaining democratic governments, subject to the
rule of law, that respect and protect individual liberty. At the
same time, the defense of human rights clearly serves our
national interest.
As the history of the past century has shown, the strongest, most
stable, tolerant, and prosperous countries are precisely those
which respect universal human rights. For that reason, we have
long made the promotion of human rights a focus of our foreign
policy and our foreign assistance programs.
Since the end of the Second World War, the United States has been
without equal in articulating a vision of international human
rights and having the grit to carry it out. Whether crafting the
United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, championing freedom and democracy throughout the Cold
War, insisting on human rights in the Helsinki Final Act,
compiling the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for the
past 25 years, or helping establish the Community of Democracies
in Warsaw last year, the United States has been the country that
has set the agenda and has done the heavy lifting. Throughout
these years, our message has not wavered. Promoting democracy and
protecting the individual against the excesses of the state is
the policy of the United States.
Fortunately, that effort has been successful. The U.S. vision has
come to be shared by many other states, and is now a fundamental
component of NATO, the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe, and the Organization of American States and the Summit
of the Americas, and in the basic laws of many states that have
emerged since the end of World War II. It is increasingly an
important factor in decisions of countries in other regions, for
example in Africa.
Let me turn now to a subject that has been much in the news
recently: the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. I am
sure you are all aware of the UN Economic and Social Council vote
in New York on May 3, which resulted in the United States losing
its seat for the first time since the Commission was created in
1947 under the chairmanship of Eleanor Roosevelt.
As President Bush said on Cuban Independence Day last week at the
White House: "Last month, the UN Human Rights Commission called
on Castro's regime to respect the basic human rights of all its
people. The United States' leadership was responsible for passage
of that resolution. Some say we paid a heavy price for it, but
let me be clear: I'm very proud of what we did. And repressed
people around the world must know this about the United States:
We might not sit on some commission, but we will always be the
world's leader in support of human rights."
The President was right: we did pay a price for taking
forthright, principled positions at the Commission this year.
Secretary of State Colin Powell spoke about this when he
addressed the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign
Operations May 15, and he stressed that the future policy of the
United States toward the Commission would be the result of a
review and ultimately a decision by the President. This review is
now under way within the Administration.
As the President said, the United States will remain committed to
human rights. It will be a crucial part of our approach to China,
Cuba, Indonesia, the Balkans, Iran, Sudan and all the other
places where fundamental freedoms are at stake. We are working
ever closer with our friends and allies at the UN, the OSCE, OAS,
NATO, and other multilateral organizations, and the State
Department remains strongly committed to its round-the-clock,
round the year, round-the-world human rights monitoring
portfolio.
We shall continue to be the world's leading advocate for
democracy and human rights. We shall continue to meet foreign
government officials, and insist that our views on human rights
be known. We shall speak up for the dissidents, the victims of
persecution, the tortured and the dispossessed. We shall continue
to tell the truth when we submit our Country Reports on Human
Rights Practices to Congress and to the millions who now access
them via the Internet. We shall continue our reports on
International Religious Freedom, now in its third cycle, and a
new report on Trafficking in Persons to be released on June 1.
Is this easy? No. Is it always appreciated by our friends and
allies? Unfortunately, not. But it is necessary. It is
worthwhile. To quote the President again:
"History tells us that forcing change upon oppressive regimes
requires patience. But history also proves, from Poland to South
Africa, that patience and courage and resolve can eventually
cause oppressive regimes to fear and then to fall."
The vote at by the member states of ECOSOC has limited our role
in one highly visible forum, but it has hardly crippled us. Those
states which voted against us in the hope that they would prevent
us from being forceful advocates for human rights were sadly
mistaken. Indeed, in the policy review, to which I earlier
referred, we are taking a close look at new approaches and new
opportunities to pursue our human rights objectives worldwide. We
may be forced, for a time, to shift our tactics, but we will
never abandon our goal.
I would like to say a brief word about the proposal by some to
link the payment of our arrears to the outcome of the Commission
election. The Administration believes strongly that any attempt
to link U.S. payments to the UN -- now or in the future - to U.S.
membership in or support for the Commission is counterproductive.
Not only will withholding money or adding additional conditions
on arrears payments provide ammunition to our adversaries, but it
will also frustrate our efforts to further U.S. political
interests and push for reform of the institution and its
agencies. In the words of the President, "a deal's a deal."
While the Commission on Human Rights is far from a perfect
institution, it has done much good over the years. It established
Special Rapporteurs on country situations like the Former
Yugoslavia or Iraq, and on crucial thematic issues such as
Torture or the Independence of Judges and Lawyers. These special
mechanisms of the CHR are among the activities of the Office of
the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, former Irish President
Mary Robinson, which also maintains field offices in trouble
spots like Congo and Colombia.
We would caution against penalizing the UN, the UN human rights
program, or the Office of the High Commissioner, for the vote by
a small number of UN Member States in the Economic and Social
Council over membership in the CHR. I strongly urge the Committee
to proceed very cautiously in this regard.
Thank you.
Return
to Vinnie's Home Page
Return to Bush Administration
Page