Obama's UN Speech: Nothing New, Nothing Unexpected, Nothing Positive about the U.S.

William A. Jacobson over at Legal Insurrection summarized Obama's UN speech best. I'll copy and paste it here. If you haven't been over to the Legal Insurrection Blog, it's worth a read. Mr. Jacobson is a law professor at Cornell and quite a brilliant writer.

Barack Obama's speech to the United Nations today had some positive aspects. He gave lip service to freedom of the individual and political rights.

But overall, the speech was more of the same, that whatever the United States has done right, was just making up for what we have done wrong. There was precious little in the speech which was positive about the U.S. While not an outright apology, the entire tone of the speech was apologetic.

The United States as the shining city on the hill is dead. The entire thrust of the speech was that we have acted alone, and caused many if not most of the world's problems:

I took office at a time when many around the world had come to view America with skepticism and distrust. Part of this was due to misperceptions and misinformation about my country. Part of this was due to opposition to specific policies, and a belief that on certain critical issues, America has acted unilaterally, without regard for the interests of others. This has fed an almost reflexive anti-Americanism, which too often has served as an excuse for our collective inaction.

As to the problems caused by others, only passing notice. This passage was particularly striking in its willful ignorance:

We have also re-engaged the United Nations. We have paid our bills. We have joined the Human Rights Council.

Why did we not pay our bills? Because the UN refused to route out rampant corruption and financial mismanagement. Why did we leave the Human Rights Council? Because it had turned into a macabre anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, and anti-Western circus, and it still is. But no criticism of that, we now have made amends by rejoining.

There was much more in the speech along these lines. Read it. Hardly a nice word to say about the United States. One of the closing lines was "The United States stands ready to begin a new chapter of international cooperation - one that recognizes the rights and responsibilities of all nations."

There always was such cooperation, but when the international community failed -- as it almost always does -- we acted. Is Obama taking unilateral action off the table completely? Is 17 visits to the Security Council on an issue not enough? Will he defend the U.S. even when the world disagrees?

This speech gives me little hope.

The Big Joke

Doug Brandow of the American Spectator writes on the UN Human Rights Council (exceprts only):

The United Nations and human rights do not belong in the same sentence. Last Wednesday the UN Human Rights Council praised Cuba's human rights achievements. The Council was far more concerned about the U.S. embargo against Cuba than the Cuban government's brutality towards its own people.

The UN long has claimed to represent the greatest aspirations of humanity, running back to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was approved more than six decades ago. But the UN's Commission on Human Rights routinely embarrassed the "international community." Often dominated by human rights abusers, the body routinely whitewashed oppressive governments and spent much of its time attacking Israel. It was one of Turtle Bay's finest comedy clubs -- only the performances were underwritten by U.S. taxpayers.

Three years ago the Commission was replaced by the Human Rights Council in a vain attempt to improve operations. The Bush administration refused to dignify the body with America's presence, but in March the Obama administration announced its decision to return. Doing so obviously was a mistake.

The membership list reads like a Who's Who of repressive regimes: Angola, Egypt, Gabon, China, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan, Russia, and Cuba. Many of the other members have lesser human rights problems. Authoritarian states have an obvious incentive to go easy on their fellow autocracies. Even worse, these member governments view violating human rights as a positive good and one of the chief responsibilities of government (in their hands, at least).

As part of its commitment to human rights, the Council conducts an annual review -- which culminates in a three hour debate on the nation's human rights record. Strangely, these reviews seem a bit, shall we say, superficial?

Cuba's record isn't hard to assess. The State Department helpfully summarizes the Cuban record in its annual human rights report:

The government continued to deny its citizens their basic human rights and committed numerous, serious abuses. The government denied citizens the right to change their government. At year's end there were at least 205 political prisoners and detainees. As many as 5,000 citizens served sentences for "dangerousness," without being charged with any specific crime. The following human rights problems were reported: beatings and abuse of detainees and prisoners, including human rights activists, carried out with impunity; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions, including denial of medical care; harassment, beatings, and threats against political opponents by government-recruited mobs, police, and State Security officials; arbitrary arrest and detention of human rights advocates and members of independent professional organizations; denial of fair trial; and interference with privacy, including pervasive monitoring of private communications.

The group Freedom House ranks Cuba at the bottom in both political rights and civil liberties. "Although the degree of repression has ebbed and flowed over the past decade, the neutralization of organized political dissent remains a regime priority," explains Freedom House.

Freedom House compiles a special report on freedom of the press and, not surprisingly, ranks Cuba as "not free" in this category as well. There was some relaxation of repression last year, but "Cuba continued to have the most restrictive laws on free speech and press freedom in the hemisphere." Moreover, "state security agents continued to threaten, arrest, detain, imprison, and restrict the right of movement of local and foreign journalists throughout the year."

Cuba also is one of the worst violators of religious liberty. Last year, explained the State Department in its annual International Religious Freedom Report: "The government continued to exert control over all aspects of social life, including religious expression. Certain groups, particularly Seventh-day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses, faced significant harassment and maltreatment." Although repression had eased of late, "The Ministry of the Interior continued to engage in efforts to control and monitor religious activities and to use surveillance, infiltration, and harassment against religious groups, religious professional, and laypersons." Last month the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom placed Cuba on its Watch List since "Within this reporting period, the government expanded its efforts to silence critics of its religious freedom policies and crack down on religious leaders whose churches operate outside of the government-recognized umbrella organizations for Protestant denominations."

There are worse offenders, of course. Compare any country against Burma or North Korea and even the worse human rights offender looks pretty good. But Cuba's record could not survive the most cursory review by a serious body. Unfortunately, the Human Rights Council is not a serious body.

The UN issued an official press release summarizing the debate, if it can be called that, on Cuba and two other states (Saudi Arabia and Cameroon):

In the discussion on Cuba, speakers said Cuba had withstood many tests, and continued to uphold the principles of objectivity, impartiality and independence in pursuance of the realization of human rights. Cuba was and remained a good example of the respect for human rights, including economic, social and cultural rights. The Universal Periodic Review of Cuba clearly reflected the progress made by Cuba and the Cuban people in the protection and promotion of human rights, and showed the constructive and responsive answer of Cuba to the situation of human rights. Cuba was the victim of an unjust embargo, but despite this obstacle, it was very active in the field of human rights. The trade, financial and economic blockade by the United States should be brought to an end, as it was the primary obstacle to the full development of Cuba.

In short, the problem is not the brutality of the Castros' regime. It is the American trade embargo -- counterproductive in my view, but ignored by everyone else and actually used by the Cuban government to enhance its control. As my Cato Institute colleague Juan Carlos Hidalgo put it, "This is not from The Onion, but the UN."

After receiving its UN whitewash, the Cuban government exclaimed: "The exemplary achievements of the Cuban Revolution in relation to human rights have been acknowledged once again by the international community. It has not been possible to silence the truth."

Rather than going back into the Council, the U.S. and other serious states should make a quick exit. The problem is not Cuba. It is the UN. Saudi Arabia, too, received gentle treatment. Up the next day were Azerbaijan and China -- the latter of which praised the records of Cuba, Saudi Arabia, and Cameroon. This incestuous process will continue, day after day, at the expense of the rest of us.

Human rights. United Nations. Never shall the twain meet, except in a tiresome comedy routine in an expensive club operating out of a famed high-rise in New York's Turtle Bay.