No me da tiempo a traducir las partes más interesantes del artículo que publica hoy Valclav Havel en New York Times sobre la renovación de la Comisión de Derechos Humanos de la ONU, pero no se lo pierdan (se puede utilizar el traductor de Google):
The absence of competition suggests that states that care about human rights simply don’t care enough. Latin America, a region of flourishing democracies, has allowed Cuba to bid to renew its membership. Asian countries have unconditionally endorsed the five candidates running for their region’s five seats — among them, China and Saudi Arabia.
In past years, Western countries encouraged rights-respecting states from other regions to compete for election. This year, they have ceded the high ground by presenting a non-competitive slate for the council elections. New Zealand withdrew when the United States declared its candidacy, leaving just three countries — Belgium, Norway and the United States — running for three seats.
Even where competition is guaranteed, it is minimal. In the Eastern Europe region — which under the United Nations’ rules includes all countries behind the former Iron Curtain, including my own, the Czech Republic — the countries running for re-election are Azerbaijan and Russia, whose human rights records oscillate from questionable to despicable. Only Hungary has stepped forward to compete for the region’s two seats. The reluctance of Eastern European states to reclaim leadership from human rights abusers does not inspire confidence.
Like the citizens of Azerbaijan, China, Cuba, Russia and Saudi Arabia, I know what it is like to live in a country where the state controls public discourse, suppresses opposition and severely curtails freedom of expression. It is thus doubly dismaying for me to see the willingness of democracies in Latin America and Asia to sit by and watch the council further lose its credibility and respect.
Activists and journalists in Azerbaijan and Cuba have already appealed to the international community not to elect their nations to the Human Rights Council. States committed to human rights and the integrity of the council cannot remain indifferent. Countries must express solidarity with the victims of human rights abuses and reclaim the council by simply refusing to vote for human rights abusers in this shamefully uncontested election.
La ONU está muerta.
Ok ok, no voy a ser radical. La ONU está en coma. Agonizante.
Pero hace ya tiempo, ¿no?
Recuerdo que antes de la I Guerra de Iraq, EE.UU. tuvo que «comprar» el derecho de veto de China, «perdonándole» las sanciones por la matanza de Tianamen. La ONU es un organismo pseudodemocrático. Los «progres» como ZP condenan la II Guerra de Iraq porque no tenía el visto bueno de esta. Ojo, que no estoy diciendo que estuviese bien esa segunda guerra. Lo que me da pánico es el argumento utilizado, como si a la ONU le reconociésemos poder moral. La ONU no está muerta, Carol. No le otorgues una función que no tiene,ya que su propósito es el reparto del poder.