Friday, 21 March 2014

U S Shuns U.N. Human Rights Council Drone Talks

Obama's Team Shuns U.N. Human Rights Council Drone Talks

The United States apparently wants nothing to do with a United Nations Human Rights Council discussion on whether the country's drone strikes may violate international human rights law.
Pakistan is trying to pass a resolution in the council that would mandate an impartial investigation into U.S. drone strikes there that may have violated human rights, and the council had its third discussion about the topic on March 19. The resolution would also ensure a more accurate record of death totals from those attacks, according to Foreign Policy. The U.S., which claims the strikes are necessary to thwart potential terrorists, says the council shouldn't have jurisdiction over human rights violations that come from drone strikes, so it won't be a part of the conversation.
The U.S. vowed to be a collaborative member of the council when it decided to join in 2009 but has so far refused to declassify much of the information it has on drone strikes in Pakistan. The U.S. also conducts drone strikes in Yemen, Somalia and other nations, and many details of those programs are also classified, including the number of civilian deaths that have come as a result. Amnesty International reports that U.S. drones have killed hundreds of civilians in Pakistan alone, though the actual number may be higher.
"Clearly the U.S. government is trying to avoid a human rights obligation.” Zeke Johnson, director of the security and human rights program at Amnesty International USA, told Mashable. “It’s critical, because there are issues of life and death. The government is going around saying ‘don’t worry, trust us.’”
The U.S. State Department's main beef with with the U.N. tackling this issue, according to Foreign Policy, is that the U.S. doesn't believe the council has the expertise necessary to deal with human rights issues involving drones.
"We just don’t see the Human Rights Council as the right forum for discussionnarrowly focused on a single weapons delivery system," an unnamed State Department official told Foreign Policy. "That has not been a traditional focus area for the HRC, in part for reasons of expertise. We do not see how refinements to the text can address this core concern."
As of April 2013, the Obama administration had conducted seven times more drone strikes than its predecessor. Drone technology would likely have proliferated no matter who was president, but the hundreds of strikes paired with little transparency has irked detractors and caused organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch to question their legality.
Amnesty International published a report about drone strikes in Pakistan last October in which it talked with family members of civilians who had been killed in drone strikes despite reportedly having nothing to do with terrorist organizations.
“The U.S. has essentially acted like a hit-and-run driver on drone strikes throughout the war," Zeke Johnson, director of the security and human rights program at Amnesty International USA, told Mashable. “I think the U.S. government would be outraged if some other country like China or North Korea or Iran was using drone strikes in the way the U.S. is.”
By not attending the talks, the U.S. may be forfeiting its chance to define how the U.N. handles human rights violations with respect to drones. Of course, by boycotting the talks, it may be able to avoid abiding by any rules that come as a result of the discussions.
http://mashable.com/2014/03/20/obama-team-un-drone-talks/

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home