China says UN Security Council 'is not about human rights'

[GennGreymane]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/372c1...t-human-rights

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — China's ambassador to the United Nations is opposing further discussion of North Korea's human rights situation by the U.N. Security Council, telling reporters that "the Security Council is not about human rights."

Ambassador Liu Jieyi spoke to reporters Tuesday.

The council late last year put North Korea's human rights situation on its agenda of issues of international peace and security. That came in the wake of a groundbreaking U.N. commission of inquiry report on widespread rights abuses in the largely isolated but nuclear-armed country.

None of the council's 15 members has yet called for a meeting on the issue this year.

China is one of North Korea's strongest allies, along with Russia.

Liu says the council should focus on the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and on dialogue.

[TrumpIsPresident]

Well hes got that right, the UN isn't about human rights its about domination.

[Sunseeker]

China wouldn't know what human rights looked like if it hit China in the face with a truck.

[Bakis]

I think UN as a whole is on idle mode in regards to human rights given Saudi Arabia, a hellhole for human rights hold the chair in the UN human rights council.
I say idle cos I UN will still play a role in the future as it has been, but at the moment I cant take the UN seriously regarding human rights.

[Endus]

Well, they're right; that would be the job of the UN Human Rights Council; http://www.ohchr.org/hrc/Pages/redirect.aspx

Debates over human rights violations needs to be done by the UNHRC, not the UNSC. They're not really saying that the UN shouldn't be concerned about human rights, just that they already have a council selected to deal with that particular subject, so the Security Council should focus on issues related to their charter, not the UNHRC's charter.

Kind of like a police comissioner saying it isn't the cop's job to fight fires. They're right. It isn't a pro-fire stance. Just a statement that fire departments cover that.

[oplawlz]

Well, they're right; that would be the job of the UN Human Rights Council; http://www.ohchr.org/hrc/Pages/redirect.aspx

Debates over human rights violations needs to be done by the UNHRC, not the UNSC. They're not really saying that the UN shouldn't be concerned about human rights, just that they already have a council selected to deal with that particular subject, so the Security Council should focus on issues related to their charter, not the UNHRC's charter.

Kind of like a police comissioner saying it isn't the cop's job to fight fires. They're right. It isn't a pro-fire stance. Just a statement that fire departments cover that.

I agree, although I wonder if the human rights issues are bleeding over into security issues. If there is rebellion brewing the arsenal NK has takes on a pretty frightening bit of instability. That's speculation though, and certainly with the isolationist policies of NK we wouldn't hear about anything like that before it flared up.

[Sunseeker]

Well, they're right; that would be the job of the UN Human Rights Council; http://www.ohchr.org/hrc/Pages/redirect.aspx

Debates over human rights violations needs to be done by the UNHRC, not the UNSC. They're not really saying that the UN shouldn't be concerned about human rights, just that they already have a council selected to deal with that particular subject, so the Security Council should focus on issues related to their charter, not the UNHRC's charter.

Kind of like a police comissioner saying it isn't the cop's job to fight fires. They're right. It isn't a pro-fire stance. Just a statement that fire departments cover that.

But that's not entirely true, since the UNSC can act on the basis of UNHRC rulings...or whatever it is they actually do.

[Endus]

But that's not entirely true, since the UNSC can act on the basis of UNHRC rulings...or whatever it is they actually do.

Yes, but the point was that human rights issues were being raised in the UNSC rather than in the UNHRC, which isn't how it's supposed to work. If you have concerns about human rights abuses, you're supposed to bring that to the UNHRC. Then they'll rule, and that'll get passed on to the UNSC for enforcement.

It's just procedural stuff, rather than a "we don't care about human rights" statement.