scholarly journals United States Withdraws from the UN Human Rights Council, Shortly After Receiving Criticism About Its Border Policy

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 (4) ◽  
pp. 745-751 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Human Rights Council ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
Undocumented Families ◽  
Border Policy ◽  
The United Nations

On June 19, 2018, the United States withdrew from the UN Human Rights Council. Announcing this decision, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley characterized the Council as “a protector of human rights abusers and a cesspool of political bias.” U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo observed that while “the United States has no opposition in principle to multilateral bodies working to protect human rights,” nonetheless “when organizations undermine our national interests and our allies, we will not be complicit.” The withdrawal occurred one day after the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights criticized the United States in a speech at the Human Rights Council for its “unconscionable” practice of forcibly separating undocumented families entering the United States. In August, U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton stated that in addition to withdrawing from the Council, the United States would also reduce its assessed contribution to the United Nations by the amount that would ordinarily flow to the Human Rights Council and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

On Behalf of the United Nations

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Falk
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
Special Rapporteur ◽  
Human Rights Council ◽  
Occupied Palestinian Territory ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Palestinian Territory

This chapter reflects on the role as special rapporteur of the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC), which investigated the human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The chapter first provides an overview of the role and office of special rapporteur, noting that UN concerns about Israel and responses to Palestinian grievances are highly politicized within the organization, before discussing some of the characteristics that distinguish the mandate established by the HRC and made applicable to Occupied Palestine. It also explains what was accomplished in six years as special rapporteur of the HRC and details the controversies and pressures attached to that job. It shows that the “UN” comprises different layers, agendas, and interests. The chapter claims that while the United Nations secretary-general in New York permitted personal attacks against the special rapporteur, the leadership and professionals of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva strongly supported his efforts in what the chapter calls the “legitimacy war”.

scholarly journals U.S. Race Relations and Foreign Policy

2021 ◽  
pp. 77
Author(s):  
Susan Page
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Race Relations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Call To Action ◽  
The United Nations

It is easy for Americans to think that the world’s most egregious human rights abuses happen in other countries. In reality, our history is plagued by injustices, and our present reality is still stained by racism and inequality. While the Michigan Journal of International Law usually publishes only pieces with a global focus, we felt it prudent in these critically important times not to shy away from the problems facing our own country. We must understand our own history before we can strive to form a better union, whether the union be the United States or the United Nations. Ambassador Susan Page is an American diplomat who has faced human rights crises both at home and abroad. We found her following call to action inspiring. We hope you do too.

The United States Reaction to the Korean Attack: A Study of the Principles of the United Nations Charter as a Factor in American Policy-Making

1961 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edwin C. Hoyt
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
General Terms ◽  
Legal Factor ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
United Nations Charter

Little scholarly effort has been devoted to consideration of the part actually played by international law in national decision-making. Diplomatic historians have tended to neglect the legal factor. Political scientists have discussed the rôle of law largely in general terms. The effort of international lawyers has been focused on statement of what the law is supposed to be. Some of this attention might usefully be diverted to study of the place of the legal factor in the making of specific decisions. Such studies should make possible more realistic discussion of the question whether the policy-makers are assigning the degree of emphasis to the factor of international law which is best calculated to promote the national interests and values they aim to serve.What is attempted here is one case study focusing on the legal principles of the United Nations as a restraint and as an incentive to action in the United States reaction to the 1950 Communist attack in Korea. That reaction took two parts: (1) a decision to assist Korea within the framework of the United Nations, and (2) a decision to isolate Formosa from Communist attack by individual American action. After a brief outline of the Charter principles in question, we will consider the way in which each of these decisions was made, together with the domestic and international consequences in each instance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document