Pyongyang, March 10 (KCNA) — The United States’ arbitrariness in the process of reforming the United Nations gives rise to the opposition and denunciation by the international community.
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, in a press interview held in the UN headquarters on March 2, expressed his dissatisfaction at the continued US rejection of the resolution for creation of a new Human Rights Council and urged the United States to change its stand.
The issue of the creation of the council in replace of the UN Committee on Human Rights was agreed at the UN summit in last September as a primary one for the UN reform.
With the serious disparity of opinions on the issue between developing countries and the Western countries including the United States, the president of the UN General Assembly presented a draft resolution compromising their opinions on February 23.
According to it, the council will be composed of 47 nations and each member nation shall be elected with the approval of the majority of the UN members.
It was supported by the Western European countries including UK, its ally, as well as developing countries.
But the United States alone stands against it.
Bolton, US ambassador in the UN, persisted in the unilateral stand that a country can enter the council on the basis of meeting some conditions and winning support of two thirds of UN member nations and raved that his country could not accept the draft resolution.
From the beginning, the United States was displeased with the agreement of the UN summit on the issue and boycotted the negotiation for forming the council. Entering the year, it suddenly raised a hue and cry, saying that it would certainly bring into shape a fresher and stronger organization, what it calls human rights council.
Today when a compromise suggestion on the formation of the Human Rights Council has been advanced to enjoy a wide support, the United States again resorts to a tacit trick.
It attaches this or that condition to the qualification for entering the council. This has nothing to do with the democratization of the United Nations, the essence of the UN reform.
The U.S. calculates that if the door of the council is narrowed, it is impossible for the countries, which have been charged with “human rights faults” by the American-way “human rights standard”, to admit to the council. It, in the long run, intends to turn the council into a club swayed by pro-U.S.-countries and to realize the “color revolution” in sovereign nations.
The U.S. intends to make the council as “a new and powerful” means for “human rights” offensive against the anti-U.S. independent countries and for American-style “democratic revolution” in the whole world.
The question is not limited only to the issue of forming the United Nations Human Rights Council. The U.S. ignores the regional rotation principle which has been adhered to in the election of the UN secretary general and asserts that the right to appoint personnel of the United Nations and manage it should be handed over from the UN General Assembly to the secretariat of the UN secretary general. It is nothing but a trick to install a puppet of the United States in the chair of the secretary general and to realize the dictatorship over the UN through him.
The U.S. does not hesitate to threaten the international community, clamoring that if its demand on the UN reform is not accepted immediately, it will block the adoption of the UN budget. Even the New York Times exposed such threat discloses in relief the impression that the whole course of UN reform is one of usurping the power by the U.S. administration.
The UN “reform” persisted by the U.S. means, in essence, the expansion of the “anti-terror war” for realizing the American-way “liberal world” to the UN.
All the facts prove this.
It, however, is a miscalculation. The U.S. is being further isolated in the UN arena for its high-handed arbitrariness.
VOA reported that the U.S.’s demand regarding the UN “reform” burst up the indignation of the G-77 which embraces 130-odd UN member nations.
The brigandish and reckless intention of the U.S. to the UN arena as the object of the “anti-terror war” will come across greater opposition in the future.
Image credit: https://www.flickr.com/photos/fljckr/1027133746/