US Pullout Gives Upper Hand to Human Rights Abusers Worldwide

Civil Society, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

The UN General Assembly votes to suspend the rights of the membership of the Russian Federation in the Human Rights Council during an Emergency Special Session on Ukraine. April 2022. Credit: UN Photo/Manuel Elías

UNITED NATIONS, Feb 14 2025 (IPS) – When some of the world’s “authoritarian and repressive regimes” were elected as members of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) –including Cuba, China, Russia, Kazakhstan and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) — a US Congressman Dana Rohrabacher infamously remarked: “The inmates have taken over the asylum, I don’t plan to give the lunatics any more American tax dollars to play with.”


That remark brought back memories of a 1975 award-winning Hollywood classic “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”, with Jack Nicholson as a rebellious patient causing havoc at a US mental institution while leading a group of protesting inmates.

And last week, the US decided, metaphorically speaking, to fly over the cuckoo’s nest—and withdraw from the Geneva-based 47-member Human Rights Council.

https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/04/1115782

Dr. Simon Adams, President and CEO of the Center for Victims of Torture, told IPS the Human Rights Council and all United Nations bodies are better and stronger with the United States being actively engaged.

“Any state withdrawing from the HRC only encourages the dictators, torturers, and human rights abusers of the world. At this moment in history, with creeping authoritarianism and human rights under attack in so many parts of the world, the Human Rights Council remains indispensable,” he added.

UN Human Rights Council in session in Geneva. Credit: UN Photo/Elma Okic

Ambassador A.L.A. Azeez, a foreign policy commentator, who previously served as Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva, told IPS the United States’ withdrawal from the UNHRC is a counterproductive move that harms both US interests and the global cause of human rights.

This departure from a critical multilateral institution is unlikely to achieve transformative change within the council. It never happened with its previous withdrawals, nor may it happen now, with the current one, he pointed out.

What does it achieve then?

“It removes the US’s opportunity to engage constructively with members and stakeholders, contributing to the strengthening of human rights multilateralism. By exiting, the US forfeits its ability to shape the narrative, push for necessary reforms, and advocate for its values”.

Human rights multilateralism, he argued, depends on the engagement and collaboration of diverse nations. Not one state or a small group of states alone however influential they are!”

This withdrawal amounts to an abdication of shared responsibility for promoting and protecting human rights. It risks signaling a diminished US commitment to human rights, potentially eroding the international human rights system and damaging whatever credibility and moral authority the US has on the world stage, said Ambassador Azeez.

Periodic withdrawals from international bodies like the UNHRC severely damage the US’s image as a steadfast defender of human rights and multilateralism. The US cannot afford to project an image of selective engagement, perceived as contingent on the council’s alignment with US views.

This erosion of credibility hinders the US’s ability to lead by example and effectively champion human rights.

The primary motivation for the withdrawal seems to be concerns about bias against a close US ally in the Middle East. While such concerns are often expressed, is exiting the council the best solution? A more constructive approach would be to remain engaged and work to address perceived concerns from within.

While strategic calculations may drive the idea of disengagement from multilateral bodies, the era of unipolarity is over. Multilateralism must reassert itself, acting as a mediating force among competing geopolitical interests. The importance of remaining engaged in multilateral human rights efforts and driving meaningful change from within cannot be overstated, declared Ambassador Azeez.

Responding to a question at the UN press briefing February 4, UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said: “It doesn’t alter our position on the importance of the Human Rights Council as part of the overall human rights architecture within the United Nations,” he said.

“And on UNRWA, I’m not sure that’s something that’s very new. I mean, and again, it doesn’t alter our commitment to supporting UNRWA in its work, and in its work of delivering critical services to Palestinians under its mandate,” said Dujarric.

Amanda Klasing, National Director, Government Relations & Advocacy with Amnesty International USA, said announcing that the United States is withdrawing from the Human Rights Council when it is not even a sitting member, is just the latest move by President Trump to demonstrate to the world his complete and blatant disregard for human rights and international cooperation — even if it weakens U.S. interests.

“Our world needs multilateral cooperation around shared interests, especially the protection of human rights. International institutions will continue to function, either with the U.S. or without it, but it seems that President Trump is uninterested in having a seat at that table to shape the norms and policies of the future, or even to protect the human rights of people in the United States”.

The HRC provides a global forum for governments to discuss human rights concerns, can authorize investigations that bring to light human rights violations, and, while not perfect, is a tool to hold governments accountable in fulfilling their human rights obligations, including to their own population.

President Trump’s performative decision to pull the U.S. out of the HRC, Klasing pointed out, signals to the rest of the world that the U.S. is happy to completely cede important decisions about human rights violations happening across the globe to other countries.

“This isn’t about President Trump thumbing his nose at the institution, instead he’s just demonstrating he’d rather make a callous show of rejecting human rights than do the work needed to protect and promote human rights for people everywhere, including in the U.S.”

https://www.amnestyusa.org/press-releases/u-s-withdrawal-from-un-human-rights-council-is-performative-disregard-for-human-rights/

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Legal Amendments in Iraq Threaten Rights of Women and Girls

Civil Society, Gender, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Middle East & North Africa, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: United Nations, Iraq

BEIRUT, Lebanon, Feb 12 2025 (IPS) – Efforts to end child marriage in Iraq are facing a serious threat, with the Iraqi Council of Representatives’ approval of amendments to Iraq’s Personal Status Law raising grave concerns that it risks permitting child marriage for girls.


These legal amendments would grant religious authorities in Iraq greater control over family matters such as marriage, divorce, inheritance, and the care of children by allowing clerics in Islamic Courts to rule on these in accordance with the clerics’ interpretations of Islamic law.

This includes permitting the marriage of minors according to the specific religious sect under which the marriage contract is conducted, meaning that the minimum age of marriage could be lowered below 18, and could vary between different religious denominations.

If this goes ahead, it would be a profound violation of human rights and risks undermining legal protections for women and girls, in direct contravention of international human rights commitments, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Iraq is a signatory.

It is important to note that these changes have not yet been made to Iraq’s personal status law. The amendment passed by the Iraqi Council of Representatives on January 21, 2025, only granted religious authorities the ability to interpret and potentially modify the law, but the alterations have not been implemented yet.

On February 4, Iraq’s Federal Supreme Court suspended implementation of the controversial bill after a number of members of parliament filed a complaint on the grounds that the voting process was illegal. This provides a crucial opportunity for continued advocacy, with the persistent efforts of civil society organizations already having a positive impact.

Now is a critical moment to join together in action to help safeguard and strengthen the rights of women and girls in Iraq, and prevent their fundamental human rights from being further eroded.

Child marriage puts girls at greater risk of harm

If the amendment is implemented, it could end a ban on the marriage of children under the age of 18 that has been in place In Iraq since 1959 – although this did include a provision allowing a child to be married with a judge’s consent.

In 2022, UNICEF reported that 28% of girls in Iraq were married under the age of 18, and 7% were married before they turned 15. Child marriage rates vary across different Iraqi regions, with the highest prevalence found in Missan (43.5%), Najaf (37.2%), and Karbalah (36.8%).

Legalizing child marriage under any pretext sets a dangerous precedent. It is not a cultural or religious necessity but a harmful practice that perpetuates cycles of poverty, illiteracy, and gender-based violence.

Marrying girls while they are still children puts them at greater risk of exploitation and is associated with higher rates of early and forced pregnancy, physical and sexual abuse, psychological trauma, and limited access to education, employment, and financial independence.

Women and girls need greater protection in personal status laws

Personal status laws govern some of the most intimate aspects of family relationships, such as marriage, divorce, child custody, inheritance, and property ownership. In many countries, these laws are deeply rooted in discriminatory traditions that prioritize the rights of men and boys over women and girls.

As a result, women and girls in Iraq, and in many other countries, continue to face significant challenges due to sex discrimination written into personal status laws.

Reforming this type of legislation has proved to be one of the most intractable areas of legal change because laws governing family relationships are deeply intertwined with beliefs about religion, tradition, and culture.

The weakening of legal protections for women and girls in Iraq reflects a disturbing global trend. Around the world, efforts to roll back laws that protect women’s and girls’ rights are gaining momentum, putting millions at risk of child and forced marriage, sexual and gender-based violence, and forced pregnancy due to curtailed access to reproductive healthcare.

Collaborating to protect women’s and girls’ legal rights

The proposed amendments to Iraq’s Personal Status Law threaten to normalize harmful practices like child marriage, potentially undermining decades of progressive reform that established greater safeguards for women and girls and helped unify the country’s family law provisions.

As the United Nations in Iraq has highlighted in its statement released in response to recent developments, legal reforms must “align with Iraq’s international human rights commitments, particularly in relation to safeguarding the rights and well-being of women and children, in a way that meets the aspirations of the Iraqi people and preserves the country’s historic achievements and gains.”

Women’s rights supporters are united in opposition to harmful legal reforms that endanger the rights of women and girls across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Local advocates in Iraq are collaborating alongside leading MENA women’s rights organizations as part of the Hurra Coalition, which seeks to reform family laws at national and regional levels in compliance with international human rights standards.

Through evidence-based advocacy and survivor-centered approaches, Hurra Coalition members are building a regional movement to protect girls’ rights within the family, their safety, and autonomy over their futures.

This includes calling for comprehensive family law reforms that uphold and advance equality, ensure safety, and guarantee access to justice for all, without discrimination. We urge the global community to support the human rights of Iraqi women and girls by amplifying advocacy and promoting their protection.

Governments, lawmakers, and global institutions must stand firm in upholding the legal rights of women and girls to safeguard them from harm in Iraq and in all countries around the world.

Dr. Dima Dabbous is Equality Now’s Regional Representative in the Middle East and North Africa

Equality Now is an international human rights organization dedicated to protecting and promoting the rights of all women and girls worldwide. Its work is organized around four main program areas: Achieving Legal Equality, Ending Sexual Violence, Ending Harmful Practices, and Ending Sexual Exploitation, with a cross-cutting focus on the unique challenges facing adolescent girls.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

The “Fierce Urgency of Now”– to Reverse Course in Haiti

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, International Justice, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, Latin America & the Caribbean, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Haiti’s destiny ‘bright’ despite terrifying escalation of violence. Credit: UNOCHA/Giles Clarke
 
Young Haitians are calling for peace and stability in the troubled Caribbean nation.

NEW YORK, Jan 27 2025 (IPS) – As we commemorated Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s Day on January 20, 2025—a day that also marked America welcoming its newly elected president—we honor the legacy of this civil rights leader by reflecting on his powerful words: “We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now.”


These words resonate deeply as we grapple with the ongoing struggle to sustain hope in Haiti and reclaim our pride as the first Black republic to achieve freedom, won through the sacrifice and blood of our ancestors in their fight against colonialism.

How ironic it is that today, we—descendants of those who fought for liberty—are mocked in a land that proclaims itself the “Land of the Free.” We live in fear of deportation, our only crime being forced out of our homeland by unbearable circumstances. These circumstances have been shaped, in large part, by decades of misguided foreign interventions and interference.

Since the much-acclaimed U.S. military intervention in 1994, which was intended to uphold democracy, we have instead seen the dismantling of Haiti’s military and a reversal of order in our country. For the past 30 years, we have endured chaos and anarchy fueled by ineffective Haitian leadership, propped up under American tutelage.

Unless Haiti is allowed to chart its own course, the much-touted “assistance” provided in the name of empathy will only perpetuate the root causes of our problems, dooming yet another generation of young Haitians.

Recent statements by Senator Rubio, during his confirmation hearing as Secretary of State, praising the increased deployment of troops from Kenya and El Salvador, do not inspire hope for meaningful change. These actions appear to perpetuate the same failed policies that prioritize foreign-led solutions over empowering Haitians to reclaim control of their future.

Despite this, we take a moment to extend our prayers and best wishes to Mr. Trump as he assumes the role of leader of the free world. While his previous rhetoric may have reflected misgivings about us, we remain hopeful that he will prioritize the shared interests of our two nations.

We fervently wish that his administration will support The Future We Want embodied in the Ayiti 2030 Agenda Initiative as a path toward immediate order and stability in our country.

A Call to Action

We urge all members of the Haitian community and their friends to contact their elected representatives and advocate for support of The Future We Want: The Ayiti 2030 Agenda Initiative.

The Future We Want:

    1. A United Haiti – Achieved through a transitional government authority that unites all factions and the nation without foreign interference.
    2. A Country of Institutions – Guided by a transitional government committed to electoral reforms, ensuring that future elections reflect the true will of the people and inspire confidence among all stakeholders, rather than devolving into superficial popularity contests.
    3. A Country of Jobs – Spearheaded by a transitional government that mobilizes resources from Haitians abroad to launch a massive, community-led relief effort focused on humanitarian intervention—not foreign armed intervention—paving the way for dynamic economic innovation.

The world must know that, as a people who have cherished freedom as deeply as Americans have, we are fully capable of rebuilding our nation without divisive foreign interference.

Haiti will rise again.

Haiti shall overcome!

Harvey Dupiton is Head of United Nations Association, Haiti, and Member of the NGO Community at the United Nations

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

UN Claims to Strengthen Battle Against Racism in Workplace—Amid Reservations

Civil Society, Democracy, Featured, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, International Justice, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

The UN reflects on its progress addressing racism within its Secretariat as it approaches its 80th anniversary, highlighting the impact of the Anti-Racism Office since its inception in 2023

UN Staff Honour Colleagues Fallen in Gaza. Credit: UN Photo

UNITED NATIONS, Jan 16 2025 (IPS) – As the United Nations plans to commemorate its 80th anniversary later this year, it is “reflecting on the steps taken to advance implementation of the Secretary-General’s Strategic Action Plan for addressing racism in the UN Secretariat.

The UN’s Anti-Racism Office, which was created in 2023, has hosted several online events that reached over 13,500 participants and generated 2,000 comments, and welcomed 2,700 visitors to its iSeek page (accessible only by staffers)—possibly a reflection of the rising complaints and concerns of UN staffers.


In a circular to staffers, the Office claims it has “collaborated closely with other UN entities and a growing global network of Anti-Racism Advocates, to foster a workplace that is safe, inclusive and equitable for all UN personnel, regardless of their race”

Together with the Office of Human Resources (OHR) and the Department of Operational Support (DOS), the Anti-Racism Office has been working on increasing fairness in recruitment processes through projects such as strengthening “blind hiring” practices and requiring diversity on hiring panels, which will be fully implemented in 2025.

Ian Richards, former President of the Coordination Committee of International Staff Unions and Associations (CCISUA), representing over 60,000 UN staffers, told IPS some of the practices being proposed, such as “blind hiring” and “mixed panels”, make sense. The unions have been requesting this for years. Although defining racial diversity in a legal manner may prove challenging.

At the same time, he pointed out, there are many competing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, (DEI) initiatives right now: Anti-racism, gender parity, disability inclusion, LGBTQIA, regional diversity, age diversity.

Each has their own office, coordinator, focal point network, action plan, policy, task force, ICSC agenda item, quota system or communication strategy. And each response to a legitimate grievance, said Richards, an economist specializing in digital business environments at the Geneva-based UNCTAD.

However, some of these conflict with each other, and HR officers and staff in general are finding it a bit hard to keep up.

“For any of this to be really effective, there needs to be some consolidation and prioritisation. Hopefully the SG can have a strategic think about this so we have the best outcome for all”, he declared.

A survey by the UN Staff Union in New York in 2021 was equally revealing.

According to the findings, 59% of the respondents said “they don’t feel the UN effectively addresses racial justice in the workplace, while every second respondent noted they don’t feel comfortable talking about racial discrimination at work”.

Meanwhile, the UN Secretariat in New York, faltered ingloriously, as it abruptly withdrew its own online survey on racism, in which it asked staffers to identify themselves either as “black, brown, white., mixed/multi-racial, and any other”.

But the most offensive of the categories listed in the survey was “yellow” – a longstanding Western racist description of Asians, including Japanese, Chinese and Koreans.

A non-apologetic message emailed to staffers read: “The United Nations Survey on Racism has been taken offline and will be revised and reissued, taking into account the legitimate concerns expressed by staff.”

Meanwhile the UN Special Adviser for Addressing Racism in the Workplace, Mojankunyane Gumbi of South Africa, has been “actively visiting different UN duty stations worldwide, holding town hall meetings with staff and leadership from various departments to discuss and address issues related to racism within the organization”.

The Special Adviser, who as appointed January 2023, has been providing “strategic advice to the Secretary-General on addressing racism and racial discrimination, as well as oversee the implementation of the long-term Strategic Action Plan adopted by the Organization in 2022 to address racism in the workplace.

Following the adoption of the Strategic Action Plan, every Secretariat entity was asked to develop and implement its own action plan, while an Implementation Steering Group under the leadership and stewardship of the Special Adviser will monitor and guide corporate-level actions to implement the Strategic Action Plan.

An Anti-Racism Team has been established to support the Special Adviser.

Dr Palitha Kohona, a former Chief of the UN Treaty Section, told IPS the Secretary-General’s Strategic Action Plan is a welcome initiative.

The UN has always prided itself of its inclusive approach to hiring but, in reality, many staff harbour, often publicly unexpressed but privately discussed, reservations that race and gender influence hiring and promotions, he said.

“Unfortunately, it is widely felt that political considerations influence recruitment and promotions. Some countries have made lobbying a fine art, said Dr Kohona a former Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the UN, and until recently Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China

Some of those who were responsible for staff management, he pointed out, tended to be influenced by considerations that were not necessarily consistent with the clearly stated principles of the United Nations, especially in sensitive areas, often conceding to external pressures.

“While equitable geographical distribution must be a guiding principle, staff recruitment, promotions and placements must be done transparently and with due emphasis on merit. Today, this is not too difficult a goal to achieve given the ready availability of talent from most countries of the world. In fact, the steady flow of talent from developing countries to the developed world is an acknowledged reality.”

The goals of the Organisation will be best served if recruitment, placements and promotions occur transparently and relevant information is disseminated as widely as possible through the media, in particular, the social media, he pointed out.

Vacancies, he said, should be advertised in the languages widely used/accessed by applicants around the world. The offices processing applications should also be constituted by geagraphically representative officers.

“The UN must also proactively address the concern that the recruitment of General Staff tends to be biased in favour of certain nationalities,” he declared.

Speaking strictly off-the-record, a senior UN staffer told IPS the official statement outlines the Anti-Racism Office’s efforts within the UN Secretariat, but it lacks a critical examination of the concrete impact of these initiatives.

While the creation of the office and its collaboration with other UN entities is a positive step, there is limited transparency regarding the actual outcomes of these actions. The implementation of “blind hiring” and diversity on hiring panels are mentioned as key initiatives, however, the statement does not provide any data, including status quo, or specific examples showing how these changes have improved or will improve fairness or representation within the Secretariat, he said.

“To effectively evaluate progress, it is essential to highlight measurable results and ongoing challenges in these areas together with the baseline data.

Additionally, while the Special Adviser’s visits and town halls with staff are commendable, the statement fails to address whether the concerns raised during these engagements by staff have led to substantive changes or policy adjustments”.

The numbers of participants and visitors to online events and iSeek are notable, but without demonstrating how these interactions have directly influenced policy changes, decision-making or led to tangible outcomes, the impact remains unclear, he noted.

“It would be more effective to provide specific examples of changes that have resulted from the efforts by the Anti-Racism Office such as improve hiring diversity, more inclusive workplace policies, or shifts in organizational culture, in particular, how the mandate of the Anti-Racism Office has impacted in addressing racism and racial discrimination within the UN”.

To truly advance its mission of fostering an inclusive and equitable workplace, he said, the Anti-Racism Office must go beyond activity metrics such as the number of participants to its virtual events, but focus on outcomes in order to achieve the goals and objectives set in the Secretary-General’s Strategic Action Plan, that was launched four years ago in 2021.

In a circular to UN staffers, Catherine Pollard Under-Secretary-General for Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance Chair of the Task Force on Addressing Racism and Promoting Dignity for All in the United Nations Secretariat, said “the Secretary-General has called upon us to condemn racism wherever we see it, without reservation, hesitation or qualification”.

“This includes looking into our own hearts and minds. The global outcry in 2020 caused us all to look inward and recognize that, in order to fight racism, we have to be proactively anti-racist.”

“As an organization, we were founded on the principles of the dignity and worth of the human person, proclaiming the right of everyone to enjoy all human rights and fundamental freedoms, without distinctions of race, colour or national origin. We have always recognized the prevalence of racism and racial discrimination in society and played a key role in supporting Member States in the development of legal instruments to address this scourge”.

“I want to urge all personnel, of every race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin, to come together in the spirit of human decency and collegiality to educate ourselves on how racism may operate in society and in the workplaces of the Organization. I encourage all of you to participate in the ongoing dialogue and awareness campaigns to gain insight into how racism manifests at the workplace and how we can prevent it and support those who experience such behaviour.”

Ultimately, progress in addressing racism and racial discrimination will require unwavering commitment from senior leaders and the full participation of United Nations personnel to ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity to participate in the work of the Organization and is treated with respect and dignity. Let us stand in solidarity against racism, she declared.

IPS UN Bureau Report

  Source

Carter’s Virtue Trumps Mendacity

Armed Conflicts, Civil Society, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Health, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, International Justice, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: White House

ATLANTA, Georgia, Jan 3 2025 (IPS) – The fireplace in the State Dining Room of the White House that says, “May none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof.” President John Adams wrote that in a letter to his wife Abigail in 1800.


Jimmy Carter was by all accounts a wise, just, and decent man—a man of deep religious faith, who was also circumspect—some may say old fashioned—about his rhetoric.

He was refreshingly candid in using the country-boy phrase “I’ll whip his ass!” against Democratic primary opponent Sen. Edward Kennedy. Most reporters in that era considered it too harsh or nearly obscene, so instead, they wrote, “I’ll whip his donkey!”

Carter was honest. When asked by a reporter amid stories of the Kennedy brothers’ sexual indulgences, if he had ever had lust in his heart, he responded straightforwardly, “Yes.” That’s something no other politician would ever do. But it was easy for Carter to admit because he followed the Christian and Calvinist doctrine that “We are all sinners.”

Historians view his administration as a watershed in the civil rights struggle, especially in the South. As president he negotiated the first ever peace agreement between Israel and the Arabs. In his post-presidential years, he made a worldwide impact as a humanitarian.

Civic virtue must be faithful to the original concept of American nationhood—favoring citizens ahead of government. Liberty and justice are the watchwords of democracy, not blind obedience to politicians.

George Washington said, “There exists an indissoluble union between virtue and happiness.” Lincoln advised “Malice toward none…charity for all…firmness in the right.” Carter followed these sentiments at his inauguration with a pledge from the Biblical Prophet Micah: “Do justly, love mercy, walk humbly.”

There are two ways of recognizing people as honest and wise—by their words and by their deeds. Carter told the truth straight out—even if it was inconvenient or might hurt him. His policies were based on simple fairness, especially in his efforts to overcome the endemic racism of the Old South.

By contrast, President-elect Trump is famous for the lies and invective-filled slander constantly dripping from his lips: “When somebody hurts you, just go after them as viciously and as violently as you can…. When somebody screws you, screw them back in spades.” Trump’s brand, he said, means, “Power is the only true value.”

We teach our kids differently. “Be nice,” we always say. Sesame Street TV and First Grade teachers call out children for “Courtesy Lacking.” Why can’t we demand as much from our leaders?

Trump is a symptom of the ills of our society, not the cause. Today most of us tolerate curses and obscenities that would have scandalized our grandmothers. Trump is simply riding the crest of a flood of indecency that already exists among the public.

Let’s bring back civic virtue. Jimmy Carter may be the best example of personal rectitude among US leaders in our lifetimes. Let him be your model—not the empty, sleazy suit that is soon to be the next occupant of the White House.

James E. Jennings PhD is President of Conscience International.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

Remembering Jimmy Carter: a UN Perspective

Armed Conflicts, Children on the Frontline, Civil Society, Global, Global Governance, Headlines, Health, Human Rights, Humanitarian Emergencies, International Justice, IPS UN: Inside the Glasshouse, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Carter was a man of decency and integrity who devoted his life to promoting peace and democracy. Credit: Courtesy Kul Chandra Gautam

 
Former US President Jimmy Carter, a leader of impeccable integrity and decency who devoted his life to promoting peace and democracy worldwide. I recall his contribution to the peace process in Nepal and his leadership in combatting deadly diseases in Africa.
 
Jimmy Carter enthusiastically supported the child survival campaign led by UNICEF. He had nominated Jim Grant to be the Executive Director of UNICEF and said that it was one of the most important decisions of his presidency.

KATHMANDU, Nepal, Jan 2 2025 (IPS) – Former American President Jimmy Carter was a man of peace and principles. He presided over a tumultuous period in American history from 1977 to 1981, working hard to restore trust in government after the Watergate scandal and the divisive era of the Vietnam War. He brokered a landmark peace deal between Israel and Egypt and negotiated a historic treaty to hand over the Panama Canal to Panama.


Carter, a champion of human rights both in the US and around the world, passed away at 100 on December 29, 2024.

More than any recent American president, Carter pressed gently but firmly on autocratic regimes worldwide to respect human rights and the rule of law. When he led the country with immense moral authority, it encouraged many human rights advocates, while dictators worried about the US sanctions.

At home, Carter got many progressive legislations passed in areas of consumer protection, welfare reforms and the appointment of women and minorities in America’s judiciary. However, he had difficulties managing the US economy, the Iran hostage crisis and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. And in the 1980 Presidential election, when he lost his bid to Ronald Reagan, his active political career came to an end.

Kul Chandra Gautam

But he didn’t retire to a comfortable life, rather, he embarked on a noble mission as one of the world’s highly respected elder statesmen, deeply committed to promoting democracy and human rights. He founded the Carter Center with a motto of “Waging Peace, Fighting Disease and Building Hope”.

With his team, he worked tirelessly to help resolve conflicts, monitor elections and improve human health through campaigns to eliminate several neglected diseases afflicting the poorest people worldwide, particularly in Africa.

“For his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts, to advance democracy and human rights and to promote economic and social development,” Carter won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002.

Links with UNICEF and Nepal

Carter greatly admired UNICEF Executive Director James Grant and strongly supported the UNICEF-led global child survival and development campaign. Further, the organisation was a key partner in the Carter-led global campaign to eradicate a debilitating disease called dracunculiasis or Guinea-worm disease.

My first substantive meeting with Carter took place on August 3, 1995, at an event in Washington, DC, organised jointly by the Carter Center, USAID, WHO and UNICEF to mark the 95 percent reduction in Guinea worm cases worldwide and to recommit to its total eradication. I had a long and fruitful discussion with Carter on strengthening our collaboration in the global campaign to eradicate Guinea-worm disease.

In February 2004, I joined President Carter and WHO Director-General JW Lee on a 3-day field visit to observe and advocate for Guinea-worm eradication in Ghana. I learned about Carter’s humble personality, deep commitment to many worthy causes and impressive advocacy skills.

In our informal interactions, we often talked about Nepal.

Carter’s involvement in Nepal

Carter visited Nepal twice to observe Nepal’s Constituent Assembly Elections. He advised Nepali leaders, including the Election Commission, based on his worldwide experience and credibility in observing elections and conflict resolution. Over the years, the Carter Center produced several reports on Nepal dealing with issues related to the peace process, challenges in drafting Nepal’s Constitution and other important issues of social justice and equity.

I instinctively supported Carter’s noble efforts to promote peace, democracy and development. However, like everybody else, Carter was human and fallible, and some aspects of the Carter Center’s reports on Nepal were flawed.

In particular, Carter’s hasty verdict that Nepal’s first Constituent Assembly election was free, fair and peaceful ignored the fact that there was an unusually high degree of intimidation in many rural constituencies. The non-Maoist parties’ candidates were prevented from campaigning, and voters were threatened with physical violence for weeks preceding the actual voting.

There were well-intentioned but inaccurate analyses of Nepal’s socio-political dynamics by the Carter Center, the International Crisis Group, and even the United Nations. In their effort to appear “balanced and even-handed”, they gave the undue benefit of the doubt to the progressive-sounding rhetoric of the Maoists, ignoring their violent and corrupt practices.

Carter witnessed the insincerity and duplicity of the Maoists when they initially welcomed the 2013 election for the second Constituent Assembly but then denounced it as rigged and unfair when the results showed that they had suffered a humiliating loss.

Unlike during the first CA election, Carter took the necessary time to analyse the second CA election better. He left somewhat sobered by a deeper understanding of the Maoists’ opportunistic and undemocratic nature.

A man of faith and integrity

Jimmy Carter was a deeply religious and spiritual man who often turned to his faith during his political career. But as a progressive man and defender of human rights and gender equality, he found himself at odds with his Southern Baptist Church when it opposed gender equality, citing a few selected verses from the Bible that women must be “subservient” to their husbands and must not be allowed to serve as priests.

Carter protested and took a painful decision to sever ties with his Baptist Church, saying that parts of its rigid doctrine violated the basic premises of his Christian faith. He wrote to his fellow Baptists and published an op-ed article “Losing my religion for equality”.

Carter had a philosophical and spiritual perspective on death. As he suffered from multiple bouts of cancer treatment, he remarked, “I didn’t ask God to let me live, but I just asked God to give me a proper attitude toward death. I found that I was absolutely and completely at ease with death”.

May Carter’s noble soul rest in eternal peace.

Source: Kathmandu Post, Nepal

Kul Chandra Gautam is a distinguished diplomat, development professional, and a former senior official of the United Nations. Currently, he serves on the Boards of several international and national organizations, charitable foundations and public-private partnerships. Previously, he served in senior managerial and leadership positions with the UN in several countries and continents in a career spanning over three decades. As a former Deputy Executive Director of UNICEF and Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations, he has extensive experience in international diplomacy, development cooperation and humanitarian assistance.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source