Wrongs Rights Council head witch Navi Pillock Pillay has come out with what can only be described as a case of extreme blindness, total self-unawareness and a moronic level of disingenuousness when she accused the UNHRC of having been ineffective in dealing with Syria and other intractaable conflicts. Here is an excerpt (emphases are mine):
“I firmly believe that greater responsiveness by this council would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives,” said Navi Pillay, whose term as high commissioner for human rights ends on 30 August.
Pillay said Syria’s conflict “is metastasing outwards in an uncontrollable process whose eventual limits we cannot predict”. She also cited conflicts in Afghanistan, the Central African Republic, Congo, Iraq, Libya, Mali, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Ukraine and Gaza.
“These crises hammer home the full cost of the international community’s failure to prevent conflict,” Pillay said. “None of these crises erupted without warning.”
Pillay spoke at a meeting where the security council unanimously adopted a resolution promising more aggressive efforts to prevent conflicts.
The resolution acknowledged that the United Nations has not always used the tools in its charter for preventing conflict. It prescribed several steps for improvement, focusing on addressing human rights violations earlier and recognizing that such abuses are often warning signs of looming conflicts.
Pillay touched on the problem in her remarks. “Short-term geopolitical considerations and national interest, narrowly defined, have repeatedly taken precedence over intolerable human suffering and grave breaches of and long-term threats to international peace and security,” she said.
The human rights chief said the use of veto power on the security council “to stop action intended to prevent or defuse conflict is a short-term and ultimately counter-productive tactic”.
Pillay offered her own solutions. She proposed that the council adopt a menu of new responses, including “rapid, flexible and resource-efficient human rights monitoring missions”. And she suggested building on the Arms Trade Treaty by requiring that, in countries where there are human rights concerns, governments accept a small human rights monitoring team as a condition of purchasing weapons.
I was so flummoxed at Pillock Pillay’s statement that I was momentarily struck speechless. I was literally spluttering.
For is she herself not the vaunted head of this illustrious Council? Is not she the one who should have been setting the agenda and guiding the Council to the correct resolutions and conclusions?
But the graphics that I use (one above and one below) whenever the UNHRC or Navi Pillay’s position as High Commissioner for Human Rights aptly illustrate the reason why the UN’s human rights committees have been so ineffective. The reason has been repeated ad nauseum by Hillel Neuer of UN Watch and Israeli Ambassador Ron Prosor, besides other supporters of Israel protesting at the anti-Israel bias of the various UN human wrongs rights committees.
In a nutshell – the microscopic concentration on Israel’s alleged and unproven human rights abuses have detracted attention from the real human rights abusers around the world.
If Pillay is genuinely upset and not just engaging in a “cover your ass” exercise, the best advice I can give to and to her successor is the warning and advice offered by the indefatigable and eloquent UN Watch spokesman Hillel Neuer, whom I quoted not two weeks ago in his Test: Are you pro-human rights, or anti-Israel?
If in the past year you didn’t CRY OUT when thousands of protesters were killed and injured by Turkey, Egypt and Libya, when more victims than ever were hanged by Iran, women and children in Afghanistan were bombed, whole communities were massacred in South Sudan, 1800 Palestinians were starved and murdered by Assad in Syria, hundreds in Pakistan were killed by jihadist terror attacks, 10,000 Iraqis were killed by terrorists, villagers were slaughtered in Nigeria, but you ONLY cry out for GAZA, then you are not pro HUMAN RIGHTS, you are only ANTI-ISRAEL.
Embedded in the above quote is a video which I have posted here before but is worth watching and sharing again.
Note to Navi Pillay: You could have saved your discomfort and embarrassment at your committee’s ineffectiveness and your disingenuous criticism of it had you persuaded your colleagues at the UNHRC not to ban this video.
From the blurb of the video:
UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer exposes the hypocrisy of the UN Human Rights Council, the body that created the Goldstone Report. The Council president, Amb. Luis Alfonso de Alba of Mexico, rejects the speech as “inadmissible” — and bans it from ever being delivered again.
Luckily for us, there is UN Watch and their YouTube channel, preserving the video for posterity, exposing the hypocrisy of Pillay and her ilk.
Should we expect things to change under the new head of the Human Rights Commission at the UN?
I’m not holding my breath.