Why the U.N. Human Rights Agenda Has Been So Limited - Coursework Example

Why the U.N. Human Rights Agenda Has Been So Limited Betts, Loescher and Milner (2008) that human rights violations have been a major issue all over the world since time memorial. Historians show that almost every country in the world has been involved in human rights violation in one way or another. Some of the human rights abuses that have been witnessed in different parts of the world include torture, slavery, ethnic cleansing, and denial of rights to education, speech, association and basic needs among others. In response, the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) was formed to advocate and protect human rights from abuse either by state or citizens (Joly, Kelly and Nettleton 1997 p. 4). So far, the UNHRC has played a critical role in protecting human rights of individuals in different countries around the world. Some of the countries where the efforts of the UNHRC has been felt in protecting the rights of citizens include in the Israel-Palestine conflict, North Korea, Syria, Burma, Rwanda, Iran, Libya, Cote DIvoire, Libya and Sri Lanka, just to name but a few. Although the UNHRC has been trying to promote and protect the rights of people across the globe, Holmes (2003) argues that the council has been limited in terms of scope. As much as the UNHRC may wish to expand its operations, their agenda has been constrained by a number of factors, which typically come into play every time the council tries to set its agenda. This document seeks to investigate why the UNHRC agenda has been so limited. The UNHRC mission has been termed by pundits as a total failure. In other words, critics note that the organization that is charged with the responsibility of promoting and protecting human rights of individuals worldwide has miserably failed in fulfilling its mandate. The past seven decades have seen a rise in the human rights violations under the watch of the UNHRC (Loescher 2001, p. 29). The world still experiences numerous incidences of human rights violations in different parts of the world. The Israel-Palestine conflict, for instance, has claimed the lives of many innocent civilians under the glaring watch of the UNHRC. Although the UNHRC claims that it has made achievements in helping end the longstanding conflict, evidence shows that nothing much has been achieved in ending the conflict. Many innocent Palestinians are still being killed by the Israeli forces in the West Bank and Gaza without intervention from the UNHRC (Schaefer 2011). The same has also been observed in Syria, where many innocent Syrian civilians have been killed since the government and opposition forces began fighting in the country following the recent Arab Spring. Many refugees also continue to suffer in the camps without serious intervention from the UNHRC. These are just some of the areas, where human rights violations are reported currently. Additionally, some countries also still experience human rights abuses, such as denial of the right of association, speech, education and participation in politics among others. Although the agenda of the UNHRC is expected to cover all the areas of human rights violations, the agenda of the commission appears to have been limited by various factors. Firstly, the UN human rights agenda has been constrained by political interference. Loescher (2001, p. 32) notes that the UNHRC has not been able to set the right agenda when tackling human rights issues in certain countries due to political interference, especially from “big” countries that sit on the council that comes up with resolutions. The countries that sit on the council that come up with agendas for different countries tend to interfere with certain good resolutions because of the interests they have in those countries. This has clearly been demonstrated in a number of countries that continue with human rights violations due to political interference from powerful states. For instance, UN News service (2009) report indicate that solving the Israeli-Palestine conflict has been difficult because of the political interference from the United States who is a member of the UNHRC. The United States has often been accused several times of using its powers to influence the agenda set by the UHNRC to favor Israel. As such, it has often become very difficult for the UN human rights council to find an amicable solution to the human rights violations that are currently going on in Israel-Palestine conflict. In fact, political analysts have often claimed that the UNHRC is setting on those agendas that serve the interests of the powerful states that sit on the council. Secondly, the agenda set by the UNHRC has been limited by its inability to ensure that all the countries become members of the Rome Statute (Rushingwa 2011). The Rome Statute is an agreement of the International Criminal Court that was signed by all countries to ensure human rights protection and protection from human rights abuses by the government of different countries across the globe. The Rome Statute was signed to ensure that governments that the commit crime against humanity are charged in the International Criminal Court (ICC). Nevertheless, the UNHRC has not been able to push for the amendment of the law to ensure that all countries become members of the Rome Statute (Loescher 2001, p. 36). Currently, there are many countries who have not signed to the Rome Statute. They include the U.S., China, Indonesia and India among others. Therefore, the fact that some countries are not signed to the Rome Statute has made it difficult for the UNHRC in setting the agenda for these countries. This has given room for human rights abuses in the countries that are not members to the Rome statute. In fact, most developing countries have often accused the UNHRC of bias when setting the agenda for fighting human rights violations. The developing countries claim that most of the agendas set by the UNHRC are targeted only at the developing countries while ignoring developed and powerful countries. Again, the countries that maintain this position cite Israel, which continue to kill innocent Palestinians without intervention from the UNHRC (Olson 2014, p. 3). Kenya, for instance, recently protested at the UNHRC following the indictment of the Kenyan President and his deputy for the crimes against humanity of the 2007 post-election violence. The Kenyan government cited that the UNHRC has also been focusing its efforts and agenda for humiliating developing countries while doing nothing to intervene when such crimes are committed in powerful and developed countries. Such political sentiments have often made it difficult for the commission to set the right agenda that can help ensure that human rights are protected in all countries across the globe. Thirdly, the UNHRCs agenda has been limited by the fact that it depends on the donor funding in order to meet its objectives (Loescher 2001, p. 88). Analysis of the UNHRC budget shows that a large part of the budget that the commission uses to fulfill its mission comes from the donors. This means that before the commission can set the agenda, it must seek funding first from donors. Accordingly, this means that in the event that the commission fails to get the funds it is seeking, it cannot fulfill its agenda of promoting and protecting human rights, such as setting up a refugee camp for the displaced. Additionally, the fact that the UNHRC depend largely on donor findings also means that all their agendas must be in tandem with the demands and the wishes of the donors, failure to which they are not given funds to advance their noble course. The inability of the UNHRC to set the right agenda for a humanitarian assistance due to overdependence on donor funding from interested parties, particularly became apparent in Honduras (UNHCR 2011). Simeon (2013) noted that the UNHRCs agenda in Honduras was greatly constrained by the fact that the commission relied much on financial assistance from the U.S., which was also an interested party in the situation. Report indicates that the budget used by the UNHRC in Honduras consisted of one-third donated by the U.S. government. Therefore, because the commission needed financial assistance from the U.S. government, the office had limited power to convince the Honduras government to protect the refugees. Accordingly, this case scenario indicates that the United Nations Human Rights agendas are significantly constrained by over-dependent on donor funding, which influences any agenda set. Fourthly, the UN human rights agendas are also limited by the veto provision (Chiusiwa 1999, p. 33). The veto in this case gives total control and agenda setting to the existing permanent members. This has become a major problem to the UNHRC in setting the agenda for the world considering that the existing members of the commission who have the veto powers are only from few developed countries. This has made other countries see the commission, not only as biased in terms of its constitution, but also in setting at agenda. President Mugabe, for instance, one criticized the UNHRC following the claims of human rights violation in the country terming the commission a zombie that was being used by countries, such as Britain to advance their political scores (UNHCR 2011). Additionally, the fact that the countries that have the veto powers to make solutions regarding the agenda for the UNHRC are all drawn from developed countries have drawn mixed reactions from none members. Countries that do not have the veto powers have often question how the few countries come up with agenda for over 180 countries citing that some do not even understand the cultures and the nature of the problems facing other countries. Again, such political sentiments have often limited the agenda that the UNHRC tries to come up with since some are rejected by the countries without veto powers, making their implementation a futility. The agendas of the UNHRC has also been limited by the fact that for the commission to intervene in a certain country, the UNHRC is required to seek permission from the host country because it can enter or start operations on the ground (Rushingwa 2011). Accordingly, this has been a major impediment to UNHRC in setting an agenda since the commission is not sure, whether or not the host country would accept their intervention or not. For instance, before the UNHRC could intervene in the Yugoslavia and Honduras situation, they had to persuade the two governments before they could enter the countries and launch operations (Cunliffe and Pugh 1997, p. 135). This means that setting an agenda for a country require that the commission corporate with the host country in order to fulfill its mission; otherwise the agenda cannot be fulfilled. In fact, recently, the government of Myanmar rejected the UNHRC resolution that sought to grant the stateless Muslim minority groups, Rohingya citizenship (Tun 2013, p. 6). In rejecting the resolution, the government of Myanmar cited that it would reject any attempt by the UNHRCs attempt to impinge its sovereignty. The government of Myanmar also stressed that it would not grant the Muslim minority citizenship regardless of the pressure exerted by commission. This recent rejection of the UNHRC resolution by the Myanmar only pointed that the agenda of the UN human rights is limited to the host country. This implies that regardless of how good the agenda may seem, it cannot be implemented not unless the host country corporate with the UNHRC. In conclusion, the issue of human rights violation has been of concern to the international community since time memorial. Human rights violations have been witnessed in most countries across the globe. In response, the UNHRC was formed to protect citizens of various countries from human rights abuses. Although the UNHRC has been in place for decades, it has achieved very little as far as the protection of human rights violations are concerned. The ineffectiveness of the commission has been attributed to the fact that the agenda of the commission is influenced by political actors, donors, countries with veto powers and the host country. This has made it difficult for the commission to accomplish its missions. As such, to make the UNHRC effective, the leaders should consider reforming the commission by tackling these issues. References Betts, A., Loescher, G., & Milner, J 2008, UNHCR: The politics and practice of refugee protection into the 21st century. Routledge, London. Chiusiwa, J 1999, How effective has the UNHCR been in fulfilling its mandate to protect refugees. Working Papers, Complex emergencies. Asia pacific Press, Beijing. Cunliffe, A., & Pugh, M 1997, The politicization of UNHCR in the former Yugoslavia.  Journal of Refugee studies, vol. 10, no. 2, pp.134-153. Holmes, K. R 2003, The challenges facing the United Nations today: An American view, viewed 8 Dec. 2014 http://www.cfr.org/international-organizations-and-alliances/challenges-facing-united-nations-today-american-view/p6451 Joly, D., Kelly, L and Nettleton, C 1997, Refugees in Europe: The hostile new agenda. An MRG International Report, vol. 96, no. 5, pp.1-44. Loescher, G 2001, Review of UNHCR and the erosion of refugee protection. Forced Migration Review, vol.10, pp. 28-30. Loescher, G 2001, The UNHCR and world politics: A perilous path, Oxford University Press, New York. Loescher, G 2001, “The UNHCR and world politics: State interests vs. institutional autonomy,” International Migration Review, vol. 35no. 1, pp.33-56. Olson, A 2014, “Burma wants country off un human rights agenda,” The Irrawaddy, 30 September, p. 3. Rushingwa, C 2011, The perilous path of the UNHCR. E-International relations studies, viewed 8 Dec. 2014 http://www.e-ir.info/2011/07/19/the-perilous-path-of-the-unhcr/ Schaefer, B. D. 2011, United Nations: Urgent problems that need congressional action, viewed 8 December 2014 http://www.heritage.org/research/lecture/2011/02/united-nations-urgent-problems-that-need-congressional-action Simeon, J. C 2013, The UNHCR and the supervision of international refugee law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Tun, S. Z 2013, “Myanmar rejects U.N. resolution on Rohingya Muslims,” Reuters, 21 Nov. 2013, p. 6. UNHCR 2011, What we do: Help the uprooted and stateless, viewed 8 Dec. 2014 http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646cbf.html UNHCR 2011, A global humanitarian organization of humble origin, viewed 8 Dec. 2014 http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646cbc.html UN News service 2009, UN investigating case of asylum-seekers sent back to Libya by Italy, viewed 8 Dec. 2014 http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/4a8a7326c.html Read More