Commentary
Imagine a tribunal where governments appear to face the world's judgment on their respect for human rights. Now imagine Moammar Gadhafi's Libya sitting on that tribunal.
It sounds absurd. But it is the true picture of the U.N. Human Rights Council.
World leaders display something of a "who, me?" attitude, as if they only discovered Gadhafi's viciousness in the last few weeks, after he responded to calls for democracy by slaughtering his own people.
But Gadhafi's outrages, not just his buffoonery, have been well known for decades. And yet, on May 13, 2010 -- less than a year ago -- the United Nations elected Libya to the UNHRC.
An astonishing 155 countries, 80 percent of the U.N. members, supported Libya's bid. Nobody, not the United States, not Britain, not France, Sweden, Norway or any other of the countries that claim high moral standing spoke against the decision.
On March 1, suddenly stirring up from its Orwellian stupor, the U.N. suspended Libya from the human-rights body. By then, the Security Council had already noted that Gadhafi's actions "may amount to crimes against humanity."
The international community, the U.N. system, and nations in a position of global leadership, such as the United States, have displayed a baffling willingness to go along with the affronts to common sense and basic morality that have become routine at the UNHRC and other parts of the U.N. system.