Mohammad Hassaninejad, Iran’s envoy in the third committee of the UN General Assembly, said on Tuesday that biggest threat to human rights stems from “hypocrisy, politicization and double standards”. “Hypocrisy of governments who under the pretext of human rights mercilessly criticize their political foes while at the same time condone the gravest atrocities of their […]
Mohammad Hassaninejad, Iran’s envoy in the third committee of the UN General Assembly, said on Tuesday that biggest threat to human rights stems from “hypocrisy, politicization and double standards”.
“Hypocrisy of governments who under the pretext of human rights mercilessly criticize their political foes while at the same time condone the gravest atrocities of their closest allies and even worse, put their unconditional support behind them,” Hassaninejad said during his speech in a meeting of the UNGA on the draft resolution L.41 on the Situation of Human Rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Following is full text of his speech published by IRNA:
Who can argue with the fact that the gravest atrocities in our recent history have been committed by the closest allies of Canada and other main sponsors of this draft resolution? Who can argue with the fact that the cause of human rights is being abused by countries who have tried every attempt from coup and imposing war to subversive operations against a nation that has chosen to say no to their hegemonic attitudes?
This is another unfortunate occasion when the General Assembly is being dragged into taking a deeply biased and politicized decision, which further erodes the credibility of the United Nations. Human rights is once again being abused to put pressure against our people. Few would buy this biased move by Canada as a sign of respect or concern for human rights.
This political charade orchestrated year after year by Canada, only further agonizes the cause of human rights itself. Indeed, the biggest threat towards human rights stems from hypocrisy, politicization and double standards. Hypocrisy of governments who under the pretext of human rights mercilessly criticize their political foes while at the same time condone the gravest atrocities of their closest allies and even worse, put their unconditional support behind them. In fact, such governments are not confronting their political foes; rather they are ruthlessly attacking the cause of human rights.
Canada should have realized thus far that such a pointless and futile exercise is a disservice to the human rights, a harmful measure against the UN human rights mechanisms and a disrespect to the wisdom of the people who closely monitor Canada’s selective stances on human rights situations.
In fact, observing Canada’s voting record in the United Nations is highly enlightening to understand its stand on human rights. Ottawa along with very few others in the whole world have consistently and unconditionally supported Israel despite all the grave violations of human rights committed by that regime. This level of hypocrisy and double standard is mindboggling. It is, however, insulting that against such entrenched hypocrisy Canada expects others to buy this resolution as a sincere and benevolent exercise in support of human rights.
In the same vein, collecting votes through putting undue pressures on smaller countries by the main sponsors of the resolution, who wage each year a vigorous campaign of pressure and intimidation, should be viewed as another clear assault to the cause of human rights. Reaping votes by threatening of cuts in financial or development funds would not contribute in promotion of human rights, it rather further exposes dishonesty of these self-proclaimed champions of human rights.
In its very long history, Iran has never practiced slavery, colonized other nations, uprooted indigenous communities, and has never advocated for racism or racial supremacy. It is, therefore, absurd that few well-known countries who have all these dark practices and even worse in their very short history find the audacity to abuse the noble cause of human rights against Iran and the Iranians in order to advance their short-sighted political interests.
Iran’s commitment to promotion and protection of human rights is genuine and deeply rooted in the country’s culture and history. Iran derives its legitimacy and security from the voice and vote of its people. We do not outsource our legitimacy and security. This is an inherent characteristic of our political system. Accordingly, the Government views the protection of and respect for all human rights of its citizens as indispensable in ensuring its national security, prosperity and longevity.
Iranians’ attachment to democracy and human rights is incontestable. We have proven that human rights is our own priority, it is part and parcel of our national security priority. Similar to any other country, deficiencies may exist and we are determined to address them, however, it is not for those who traditionally, historically and practically supported colonialism, slavery, racism and apartheid to lecture Iranians on human rights.
Sadly, for certain powers, democracy and peoples’ choices can be respected as long as they are in line with their own interests. People who dare to choose otherwise deserve to be punished by military coup, aggression, sanctions, occupation or being demonized through abusing UN human rights machinery. In case of their allies and clients, however, democracy and respect for human rights are optional. As the content of and the intention behind this draft resolution is concerned, we clearly see that the exact same cynical pattern against Iran and the Iranians is in play. The situation of human rights in Iran by no means is a special situation to warrant a special mandate or resolution.
We regret that few unscrupulous Governments continue challenging integrity and credibility of the United Nations. An exercise that only underscores how selective, irrelevant and subjective UN decisions could sometimes become. Rejecting and voting NO to this absurd resolution that has time and again proven its futility will be considered as a right step towards enhancing the credibility of human rights discourse.