Norway Archives - UN Watch

Norway refuses to say if it voted to elect Iran to UN’s top women’s rights commission

Luis Pelaez — Thu, 29 Apr 2021 21:01:17 +0000

After a UN Watch report exposed the secret-ballot election of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations’ Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), members of the Norwegian Storting (Parliament) broke into debate over Norway’s vote. In a tense exchange, Norwegian Foreign Minister Ine Eriksen Søreide repeatedly refused to state whether Norway voted in favor of Iran’s candidacy to the UN’s top women’s rights commission.

Following is the video (in Norwegian) and the transcript (translated into English) between Foreign Minister Ine Eriksen Søreide and Storting Representative Christian Tybring-Gjedde on the floor of Norway’s Storting on Wednesday, April 28.

Christian Tybring-Gjedde: Voting Iran into the UN Commission on the Protection of Women’s Rights is like giving a firefighter the job of fire chief, said UN Watch Director Hillel Neuer. And he said it was absurd and morally reprehensible.

April 22 was exactly what the UN Economic and Social Council did, and 4 out of 15 western countries thought it was a good idea – and maybe also Norway. Who knows – at least we did not vote in this Chamber.

Iran is a religious dictatorship where women are stoned to death for infidelity, where women are imprisoned for not wearing the hijab, where punitive methods such as whipping, stoning, hanging, amputation of hands and feet, torture and rape are part of the penal system, where child marriage can be entered into from the age of 13, where forced marriage is accepted and girls are married off by guardians, and where men do not shake hands with women – all in line with sharia, Islamic law.

On the World Economic Forum’s index on gender equality, Iran ranks 139th out of 142. Norway has several times before refused to state what we have voted for when choosing countries for key positions in the UN. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs has referred to UN procedures. Well, if we voted for this, our credibility is not worth much. Then we have lost our moral compass.

The Foreign Minister has previously claimed that Norway will give Iran a clear expression of what we think about the country’s treatment of women, and she has added: and what we expect from them. It’s the story of the mouse that roared.

Norway’s voting is not about procedures. It is a signal – a signal to oppressed women everywhere else in the world.

Previously, the Foreign Minister did not want to say what Norway voted on April 22, so let me rephrase the question: Does the Foreign Minister think that Iran is suitable and has deserved to sit on the UN Commission on the Protection of Women’s Rights?

Foreign Minister Ine Eriksen Søreide: As I answered Representative Tybring-Gjedde in the debate we had on Thursday last week, Norway does not state its vote – in line with the rules of procedure in the UN. It has been the practice under changing governments, and that is because the UN system is designed so that we do not state where to vote and what to vote for. It also means that we do not let people know what we are not voting for, although of course it can be tempting at times.

As I also said in the debate we had on Thursday, it is undoubtedly the case that Iran has significant challenges when it comes to human rights. This is something we have been pointing out for a long time. That is also the reason why we join, among other things. EU restrictive measures against Iranian officials. This is also the reason why addressing human rights is always a key issue, both multilaterally and bilaterally with Iran.

When I say that there is no doubt that Iran has major human rights challenges, it also means that we believe that Iran has a very long way to go before it can be said to fulfill the fundamental rights that women and everyone else have. It also means that we will hold Iran accountable in the position they have now been given. And as the representative is probably also familiar with, there were five countries running for these five seats.

For us, it will be important to continue the very clear line we have when it comes to Iran and human rights, and especially women’s rights. We have several times recently also addressed the situation of named women rights activists when they are imprisoned, and especially recently because the corona has also made significant challenges even greater. And this is something Norway, in line with a fixed and long-term line, will continue to do.

Christian Tybring-Gjedde: I hear the Foreign Minister say that procedures are more important than morality. I do not understand how one can sit in the UN and mean it. Then the point of sitting in the UN is gone, I mean.

I’m going to go a little further, because I do not get any more answers. The process surrounding the possible sale of Bergen Engines to Russian interests has revealed weaknesses in the government’s ability to coordinate security policy. Also how we relate to countries outside our immediate areas is Norwegian security policy, because it can create mutual dependence, something the Foreign Minister also mentioned. Horse trafficking in connection with the campaign to get us elected to the Security Council is one such case, which the Minister of Foreign Affairs has seen exist. The government’s unwillingness to follow up the Storting’s decision to deny countries that do not themselves practice religious freedom, to finance religious freedom in Norway, is another example, ref. Saudi Arabia.

Can the Foreign Minister now inform the Storting about how a decision to vote in the UN is made? Is it the civil service? Is it the diplomatic corps that knows this? We do not know. Is that the Secretary of State? Is that the Prime Minister? Who is involved in knowing what we are actually doing in the UN?

Foreign Minister Ine Eriksen Søreide: It is almost impossible to answer questions that put in so many different and incorrect premises. However, let me first just say that the question of regulations regarding the financing of e.g. religious houses, is under the Ministry of Children and Family Affairs, where regulations are now being prepared, which the representative also dares to be familiar with.

It is not the case that we run horse shops when there is voting for e.g. The Security Council or the United Nations Human Rights Council. It is important for Norway to vote in a way that enables us to safeguard Norwegian interests. And it is – as I have also informed the Storting about both in statements about the Security Council’s work and in questions from the Storting representatives – that we in some contexts, it is a very common practice, enter into vote-exchange agreements with countries where we see that we can have a mutual interest, e.g. of getting Germany into the Security Council, as we typically did at the previous crossroads, and Germany wanted to get us into the Security Council. It is then based on the assessment of Norwegian interests.

President: Christian Tybring-Gjedde – for follow-up questions.

Christian Tybring-Gjedde: Vote-exchange is probably another word for horse trading, at least as I have learned what horse trading means.

The government has a duty to provide information to the Storting. The information must be true and sufficient, and with reference to Section 82 of the Constitution, it is stated that the duty to provide information stipulates that the Storting is entitled to be informed of the Ministry’s final decisions. The government has a duty to inform the Storting of what the government has decided on key issues that could potentially have consequences for the country’s leading elected representatives. If the government chooses not to do this, reference must be made to decisions made in the Storting. The Government may, when required, decide not to inform the Storting, but then it must justify this in decisions made in the Storting. Then the Security Act is relevant.

Does the Minister of Foreign Affairs believe that the Security Act is an obstacle to providing the Storting with the requested information? And most importantly: Will the Foreign Minister be willing to stand in the enlarged Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee and provide information on what Norway voted in this matter?

Foreign Minister Ine Eriksen Søreide: Again: There are many premises in this question that it is difficult both to refute in a short time and to that extent also to tell how the situation is around. But I have never claimed that the Security Act should be an obstacle to discussing voting in the UN. On the contrary, I have said that it is the UN procedural rules that mean that the countries, and this applies to all countries, do not say what voting they have, ie neither who they vote for nor who they do not vote for. It is an enshrined principle in the UN, and I believe it is a credibility and trust Norway must also continue to have.

I therefore believe that drawing the lines of the Constitution in this context will be very special. The Government obviously has a duty to provide information to the Storting and to provide truthful information. So do we. But I have also never experienced that any previous government has been exposed to the question of whether it is contrary to the Constitution.

The President: Christian Tybring-Gjedde – for follow-up questions.

Christian Tybring-Gjedde: Maybe it’s because there is a violation of the Constitution. We parliamentary representatives participate in international forums. I am i.a. Head of the NATO PA Delegation. In this context, there is also foreign policy on behalf of the Storting. It is absolutely crucial for me to know how the government relates to foreign policy also in the UN, in all possible contexts. And we have a requirement, as a nationally elected assembly, to know what the government thinks in foreign policy, and what it actually does.

The procedures in the UN are completely irrelevant to this National Assembly. I understand that it can be very pleasant for the government to refer to procedures, so that one can continue with horse trading when it comes to voting, as the Foreign Minister says. But there is actually something called morality as well, and it goes before procedures. So does the Foreign Minister think that procedures in the UN are more important than clearly showing where we stand morally?

Foreign Minister Ine Eriksen Søreide: The government shows through foreign policy where we stand. We have an open and free debate on Norwegian foreign policy. Most recently two weeks ago, I was here and gave an account of Norwegian foreign policy for one hour. We had a debate last Thursday. Every representative is free to ask both written and oral questions, ask in the debates, ask interpellations. I also experience that there is interest in the Storting. I give two annual statements on EU and EEA issues. I also give one annual report on Norway’s work in the Security Council.

In other words, there is a lot of opportunity to discuss foreign policy and where Norway stands. I feel that there is a fairly good consensus on the long lines of Norwegian foreign and security policy. This has been the case through changing governments for many years. But it is also the case, of course, that the representative Tybring-Gjedde, who often means something else, is completely free to think so. But I therefore give a thorough account of Norwegian foreign policy very often in the Storting.

The post Norway refuses to say if it voted to elect Iran to UN’s top women’s rights commission appeared first on UN Watch.

Norway freezes funds to UN Women Palestine over center named for terrorist

unwatch — Sun, 28 May 2017 12:51:34 +0000

GENEVA, May 27, 2017 – Norway has frozen all new funding agreements with UN Women’s Palestinian office in wake of a youth centre built with Norwegian aid money that was named after a terrorist who participated in the killing of 12 children.
UN Watch is now calling on all donors to UN Women to follow Norway’s example, including top donors giving tens of millions to UN Women such as Sweden, Switzerland, Japan, UK, Australia, Finland, Netherlands, Denmark, USA, Canada, Belgium, EU, Spain, Korea, Germany, Italy, and Ireland.
All donors states should follow Norway in insisting that UN Women establish “satisfactory procedures” to ensure that “nothing of this nature happens again,’ in the words of Norwegian foreign minister Børge Brende. See full Norwegian statement below.
Norway said its funding was “to promote the participation of women in elections.” It was not clear which Palestinian elections, however, as Mahmoud Abbas is now in the 12th year of his 4-year term, which was supposed to end on January 9, 2009. “Many Palestinians have never voted in presidential or parliamentary elections because Mr. Abbas has failed to hold them, even though they are called for in the Basic Law governing the Palestinian Authority,” wrote Diana Buttu on Friday.

UN Women Palestine Funds Anti-Israel Advocacy

UN Women’s Palestinian section appears to engage in a variety of programs that promote anti-Israel advocacy.
For 2017, it wants:

$211,168 to advocate internationally against Israeli policies in eastern Jerusalem. “The documented cases of women will be published in a report that will be used for advocacy purposes including advocacy tours. Besides, field visits will be organized targeting international advocacy actors based locally to raise their awareness on the issue and listen to the voices of women subject to these violations. One advocacy visit targeting UN bodies and CSOs [Civil Society Organizations] in Europe will be organized to advocate for residency rights of women in EJ [East Jerusalem]. In addition, a documentary film on the impact of residency rights policies on women in EJ will be produced.”

$164,000 for “Engendering Humanitarian Action in oPt [occupied Palestinian territory].” This includes such activities as “Design and produce advocacy materials (e.g. print, audio visual, social media, press conferences)” and “distribute advocacy materials in oPt and internationally.”
Under this category, in 2016 Spain funded a major report on how to use the subject of human rights to pursue Israel internationally for “crimes against humanity”, including “the crime of apartheid.”
The UN Women report, authored by Human Rights Watch’s Wendy Isaack, contemplates requesting an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on whether “Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian people as a whole,” including Arab citizens of Israel, violates “the prohibition of apartheid under international law.”
The report was “generously supported by the Government of Spain, Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo, AECID,” and thanks the “Ministry of Foreign Affairs, State of Palestine” and numerous UN agencies for playing “an important role” in supporting the research.

$287,280 to help women victims of Gender-Based Violence (GBV) in Gaza, where Israel is blamed for when Palestinian men beat their wives. “Over 70% of households with female members reported that the war led to increased GBV…”

@UN_Women @btselem train Bedouin women in Jordan Valley in video to tell world their stories of survival @UN_Piper pic.twitter.com/IBlvE7q3vC

— Ana Lukatela (@AnaLukatela) September 7, 2016

Statement by Norway Freezing New Agreements With UN Palestine

Norway’s full statement:

A Palestinian women’s centre in the village of Burqa on the West Bank has recently been named after Dalal Mughrabi. Dalal Mughrabi took part in a terrorist attack in Israel in 1978 that killed 37 civilians, including many children. The centre has received funding from Norway via the Palestinian Election Commission and UN Women to promote the participation of women in elections.

‘The glorification of terrorist attacks is completely unacceptable, and I deplore this decision in the strongest possible terms. Norway will not allow itself to be associated with institutions that take the names of terrorists in this way. We will not accept the use of Norwegian aid funding for such purposes,’ said Minister of Foreign Affairs Børge Brende.
It was not until after Norway had stopped providing funding for the centre that it became known that it was to be named after the Palestinian terrorist. This happened in connection with the opening of the centre last week. Neither the Norwegian authorities nor the UN were consulted in advance or invited to the opening ceremony. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs reacted immediately when it became aware of the matter today.
‘We have asked for the logo of the Norwegian representation office to be removed from the building immediately, and for the funding that has been allocated to the centre to be repaid. We will not enter into any new agreements with either the Palestinian Election Commission or UN Women in Palestinian areas until satisfactory procedures are in place to ensure that nothing of this nature happens again,’ said Mr Brende.

The post Norway freezes funds to UN Women Palestine over center named for terrorist appeared first on UN Watch.

Norwegian Coverage: U.N. elects Saudi Arabia to Women’s Rights Commission

unwatch — Fri, 05 May 2017 08:14:13 +0000

April 19, 2017 – the UN Economic and Social Council issues press release announcing Saudi Arabia’s election to the Commission on the Status of Women.

April 22, 2017 – UN Watch publishes statement on its website condemning election of Saudi Arabia to Commission on the Status of Women: No Joke: UN Elects Saudi Arabia to Women’s Rights Commission.

In Norway, the story was published extensively in the media between April 24 and 26, 2017 and the issue led to a heated debate between parliamentarians and the government:

Aftenposten, Norway’s largest printed newspaper, published a major story quoting UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer: “Electing Saudi Arabia to protect women’s rights is like making an arsonist into the town fire chief.”
NRK, Norway’s largest media organization also quoted Hillel Neuer extensively: “Saudi discrimination against women is gross and systematic in law and in practice.” In addition NRK radio broadcast a segment on the story, interviewing Hillel Neuer along with Norwegian parliamentarians and government officials.
Norway’s edition of The Local, a source for English language digital news in countries across Europe, quoted UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer extensively: “why did the U.N. choose the world’s leading oppressor of women to promote gender equality and the empowerment of women?”
NewsinEnglish.no, another online Norwegian English language publication noted: “The issue brought rare agreement between SV on the far left of Norwegian politics and the progress party on the far right.”
On April 26, 2017, members of Norway’s parliament on both sides, including Liberal leader Trine Skei Grande, Christian Democrat Knut Arild Hareide and Socialist Left party leader Audun Lysbakken, demanded to know how Norway voted. They raised the issue in parliament. Grande said: “I think it is important to be open about how Norway votes internationally. This is an alarming enough result for there to be good reason to make [the Norwegian vote] public.” Hareide said: “We probably can’t stop them from being voted in, but Norway should not have supported it and we ought to be clear about what we have done.”
On April 26, 2017, the government responded: “Norway won’t make public how we vote in secret UN elections,” said Foreign Minister Børge Brende; “Voting in connection with UN candidatures within the UN is not public,” said Frode O. Andersen, Foreign Ministry Head of Communications.

Norsk Rikskringkasting: Reality Distant about Saudi Arabia
Op-Ed by Saudi Ambassador to Norway, Esam Abid Al Thagafi
Translation of article courtesy of UN Watch, the original can be found here

It may seem incomprehensible that the West tries to demand something that most people in Saudi Arabia do not want. Why should you fight for the rights of others in another country with a different culture and religion? It is not Norway’s problem that Saudi women cannot drive a car.

Social problems will occur if women are allowed to drive or to be completely independent.

There is no country in the world where women are not discriminated against because of their gender. According to a World Bank study, violence against women between ages 15 to 44 represents a global health threat in line with diseases such as AIDS and cancer.

Aftenposten: Svensk UD: Ingen stemte nei da Saudi-Arabia fikk plass i FNs kvinnekommisjon
Referring to the news that Sweden’s FM Wallström had claimed the only two options in a vote are for or abstaining:

Wallströms ministry also claims that it is not possible to vote no in this type of voting at the UN. One can only vote yes or refrain from voting, says press spokesman Erik Wirkensjö news agency TT.
The idea that it is not possible to vote no has been rejected by the political scientist Thord Janson at the University of Gothenburg. But he confirms that it is very unusual.
The regions of the United Nations – in this case Asia – suggest which countries in the region that should join various organs. Then countries from other regions tend to respect the election.
You can vote no, but it is only countries like Iran and North Korea who do such things, says Wirkensjö.

In Norway:

Foreign Minister Børge Brende (H) was in a parliamentary question on 26 April confronted with the question of what Norway voiced when the case was heard at the UN.
The government follows the same practice as the previous governments by not disclose how to vote by secret ballot, he replied.
This has been an established international practice that has been followed by various governments in Norway, elaborated Foreign Minister.

Afterposten: SV og Frp ber Brende svare på om Norge stemte Saudi-Arabia inn i FNs kvinnekommisjon
Quotes from Norwegian politician:

“I think it’s obvious that MFA must disclose that fact, and I have noted that SV mean the same thing, says deputy head of the foreign affairs committee in parliament,” Christian Tybring- Pike (FRP).
He calls Saudi’s accession to the committee “a travesty.”
– Here are fighting one for equality both in Europe and elsewhere, also fail to promote Saudi’s candidacy for this. No one can say that Saudi Arabia has something to contribute when it comes to promoting gender equality, says Tybring- Pike.

Afterposten: Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to Aftenposten: – Islam overrides human rights
Interview with Saudi Ambassador to Norway Esam Abid Al Thagafi. Italics represent questions from the interviewer:

It is very difficult to compare human rights in Saudi Arabia with the way these works here in the West. It’s about culture. We would like to say to our Norwegian friends that we respect their opinions. But you must also respect our opinions and ideas.

But you have signed the United Nations Charter. Global human rights is part of the foundation of the UN. Does not that mean you have the same obligations as other countries?
– Of course, we have the same obligations. But while there are some paragraphs we do not agree.
What clauses is it?
– We are opposed to the clauses that are contrary to Islamic rules.
Does it mean that Islamic laws are superior to human rights?
– Not exactly, but there are Islamic rules we have to follow. For example, the death penalty one of the pillars of Islam. We practice it in Saudi Arabia, and it will continue to do.

One of the things you wrote, as many reacted to was that Saudi women are spoiled. Would you explain what you meant?
– Women do not contribute to the family economy, they can spend all the money they earn for themselves. They have no duties, and they have drivers who can drive them wherever they want. They are not trapped but can move freely.

You also write that a majority of Saudi women are happy and do not want change. How do you know that?
– We live with them, we live with them!
But have you researched this? Or is it something you just guess?
– Women writing in newspapers and participate in the public dialogue. They express their views freely, so it’s not hard to get an idea of what they mean.

The post Norwegian Coverage: U.N. elects Saudi Arabia to Women’s Rights Commission appeared first on UN Watch.

Calls for Belgian FM to Resign as Saudi-gate also roils Sweden, Ireland, Norway – Exposed by UN Watch

unwatch — Mon, 01 May 2017 01:51:31 +0000

UN Watch Sparks Firestorm Worldwide by Revealing Saudi Arabia’s Absurd Election to UN Women’s Rights Body; Opposition Leaders Demand Answers

The Secretary-General with H.E. Mr. Adel Ahmed Al-Jubeir, Minister for Foreign Affairs, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

UN Watch’s exposure of the UN’s absurd election of Saudi Arabia, the world’s worst abuser of women’s rights, to the Commission on the Status of Women, has caught the world’s attention and sparked contentious debates in parliaments worldwide.
The story has been reported by major news outlets, including:

New York Times: In ‘absurd’ move, Saudi Arabia elected to U.N. women’s commission
Newsweek: Widespread Criticism Follows Saudi Arabia Joining UN Women’s Rights Group
CNN: Saudi Arabia’s election to UN women’s commission draws ire
The Chicago Tribune: Listing quote from Hillel Neuer as one of two top quotes of the day

Many more news stories worldwide listed here.

Timeline

April 19, 2017 – the UN Economic and Social Council issues press release announcing Saudi Arabia’s election to the Commission on the Status of Women.
April 22, 2017 – UN Watch publishes statement on its website condemning election of Saudi Arabia to Commission on the Status of Women: No Joke: UN Elects Saudi Arabia to Women’s Rights Commission.
April 23, 2017 – UN Watch begin posting about the election on Facebook and Twitter. The story quickly goes viral. The initial Facebook post has almost 10,000 shares. The initial tweet is retweeted more than 1,000 times. Hillel Neuer’s April 23, 2017 Tweet “At least 5 EU states voted FOR the Saudis” is retweeted 880 times and quoted extensively by the news media.
April 24, 2017 – Major media outlets publish stories about the absurd election: New York Times, Newsweek, Fox News, National Review, Huffington Post Canada, Germany’s Bild, France’s i24 News, and many others. UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer is interviewed on Israel’s i24News English. The interview has 30,000 views on Facebook.
April 25, 2017 – UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer is interviewed on France24. Outraged parliamentarians around the world begin to speak out and question their governments.
IRELAND

Cabinet Ministers belonging to the Independent Alliance said they want the Department of Foreign Affairs to disclose how Ireland voted on Saudi Arabia’s membership of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women. Minister for Transport Shane Ross said there should be transparency, indicating that the issue is likely to be raised at Cabinet next week.
Minister of State John Halligan said the rights of women were being violated and that could not be tolerated.
However, Minister for Foreign Affairs Charlie Flanagan refused to disclose how Ireland voted, citing established diplomatic practice of member states not disclosing their voting intentions or voting decisions as the reason for his stance.
The issue of was raised in the Dáil (parliament) on repeated occasions. Fianna Fáil spokesman on foreign affairs Darragh O’Brien said he hoped Ireland played no part in facilitating that position. “Do our Government, through you, deem it appropriate that Saudi Arabia sit on a United Nations Commission on the status of women?” he asked. “Is it a question of trade ahead of human rights?” He said any person who knows anything about Saudi Arabia’s track record of treating women “would find it absolutely disgusting that the Irish Government would support” the move.
Independents4Change MP Mick Wallace, quoting UN Watch, said: “You would struggle to find any country in the world where women are treated so poorly than Saudi Arabia”. He said that the people of Ireland suspect that “diplomacy and trade interests have won out and human rights have lost out.”
Independents4Change MP Clare Daly said that the minister “cannot hide behind a spurious precedent” in not disclosing how Ireland voted.
Erin Kilbride of the human rights organisation Front Line Defenders said Ireland’s international reputation on human rights could now be questioned. “If Ireland stays silent on this, it says they no longer support the 50 per cent of the population of Saudi Arabia who cannot control their own lives.

For news articles and videos, click here
NORWAY
In Norway, the story was published extensively in the media between April 24 and 26, 2017 and the issue led to a heated debate between parliamentarians and the government:

Aftenposten, Norway’s largest printed newspaper, published a major story quoting UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer: “Electing Saudi Arabia to protect women’s rights is like making an arsonist into the town fire chief.”
NRK, Norway’s largest media organization also quoted Hillel Neuer extensively: “Saudi discrimination against women is gross and systematic in law and in practice.” In addition NRK radio broadcast a segment on the story, interviewing Hillel Neuer along with Norwegian parliamentarians and government officials.
Norway’s edition of The Local, a source for English language digital news in countries across Europe, quoted UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer extensively: “why did the U.N. choose the world’s leading oppressor of women to promote gender equality and the empowerment of women?”
NewsinEnglish.no, another online Norwegian English language publication noted: “The issue brought rare agreement between SV on the far left of Norwegian politics and the progress party on the far right.”
On April 26, 2017, members of Norway’s parliament on both sides, including Liberal leader Trine Skei Grande, Christian Democrat Knut Arild Hareide and Socialist Left party leader Audun Lysbakken, demanded to know how Norway voted. They raised the issue in parliament. Grande said: “I think it is important to be open about how Norway votes internationally. This is an alarming enough result for there to be good reason to make [the Norwegian vote] public.” Hareide said: “We probably can’t stop them from being voted in, but Norway should not have supported it and we ought to be clear about what we have done.”
On April 26, 2017, the government responded: “Norway won’t make public how we vote in secret UN elections,” said Foreign Minister Børge Brende; “Voting in connection with UN candidatures within the UN is not public,” said Frode O. Andersen, Foreign Ministry Head of Communications.

SWEDEN
Similarly, in Sweden, the media published the story between April 24 and 25, 2017, reporting that Swedish parliamentarians challenged their government on its vote:

Göteborgs-Posten, a major daily Swedish newspaper, quoted UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer: “Electing Saudi Arabia to protect women’s rights is like making an arsonist into the town fire chief.”
Expressen, a widely distributed evening tabloid also quoted Hillel Neuer: “At least 5 EU states voted FOR the Saudis.”
Borås Tidning, another Swedish daily quoted Hillel Neuer: “It is entirely up to the Swedish government to tell its citizens how it voted.”
The online magazine OmVärlden also quoted Hillel Neuer in its story.
Swedish parliamentarians demanded answers. On April 25, 2017, Swedish MP Sofia Arkelsten, member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, submitted a written question to the government and Jan Björklund, Chairman of the Liberal Democratic Party, also called for an explanation: “I hope it is not true that Sweden has voted Saudi Arabia to the UN Women Commission.”
On April 25, 2017, the government responds:
Prime Minister Stefan Löfven: “check with the Foreign Ministry”
Foreign Minister Margot Wallström wrote on Facebook: “The decision on how Sweden would act in the vote for the Women’s Commission last week was not something that was decided at the political level,” and stated that the government would reveal how it voted to the Foreign Policy Committee whose meetings are confidential.
Minister of Gender Equality Åsa Regnér said: “The UN is an organization of member states where everyone has an equal right to participate in the work of the organization.”
May 5, 2017: Swedish foreign minister Margot Wallström defends the election of Saudi Arabia, saying: Swedish FM Margot Wallstrom was asked about the election of Saudi Arabia to the UN women’s rights commission. Her response (May 6, 2017): “In the Commission of the Status of Women are almost one fourth of all the countries in this world: there is also Russia, Belarus, Iran, Pakistan. And if we would have as a criteria that they have an ambitious policy when it comes to women’s rights, very few countries would actually take place there. If there is one place where they ought to be, to learn something about women, it is in the Commission on the Status of Women. If it was about the policies that they have at home, maybe only Finland and Sweden would be left in the Commission of the Status of Women. I don’t think it would be a good idea.”

Swedish FM: If there is one place where Saudi Arabia ought to be—"to learn something about women"—it is the U.N. Women's Rights Commission. pic.twitter.com/o3B8ZTeoyt

— Hillel Neuer (@HillelNeuer) May 6, 2017

The more you subjugate, segregate, & oppress women, the more Swedish FM Margot Wallström wants you on the U.N.'s Women's Rights Commission. pic.twitter.com/aVRqVv7EAL

— UN Watch (@UNWatch) May 7, 2017

DENMARK
Denmark, though not a member of the UN Economic and Social Council that voted Saudi Arabia onto the Women’s Commission, covered the issue critically in its news outlets on April 25 and 26, 2017:

Jyllands-Posten International, one of Denmark’s largest selling newspapers, referenced UN Watch’s statistics on how many EU countries voted for Saudi Arabia.
Politiken, a leading Danish newspaper, quoted Hillel Neuer: “Electing Saudi Arabia to protect women’s rights is like making an arsonist into the town fire chief.”
Kristelight Dagblad, another Danish daily quoted Hillel Neuer: “Why did the UN choose the world’s leading oppressor of women to promote gender equality?”
Danish politician Jakob Engel Schmidt, spokesman for the governing Liberal party called the vote “deeply bizarre.”

BELGIUM
In Belgium, the story broke on April 24, 2017 and is still generating headlines. Politicians on all sides were highly critical of the government’s apparent ‘yes’ vote, forcing a public apology from the Prime Minister.

La Libre, a widely circulated Belgian French daily, published the story quoting UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer: “petro-dollars make it possible to buy everything, even a political profit.”
Le Soir, Belgium’s other main French daily, also quoted Hillel Neuer in its story.
De Standaard, Belgium’s main Flemish daily accused the Belgian government of having voted to elect Saudi Arabia and quoted UN Watch’s statement that five European countries had to have voted for Saudi Arabia in order for it to get elected.
The Belgian news agency Belga, headlined its story: “Belgium has probably supported the accession of Saudi Arabia to the UN committee on the Rights of Women.”
Belgian politicians castigated the government. On April 26, 2017, Belgian MP Wouter de Vriendt asked a parliamentary question about Belgium’s vote and said: “A positive vote from Belgium is simply shocking.” Els Van Hoof of the Christian Democrats said that defending a ‘yes’ vote is equivalent to admitting a vote for the misogynistic regime. Yasmine Kherbache of the Socialist Party accused the government of legitimizing “a regime that violates women’s rights every day.”
On April 26, 2017, the government responds: Foreign Minister Didier Reynders issued a contradictory statement about the vote. He refused to confirm how Belgium voted, but justified the election of Saudi Arabia on multiple grounds. He said: “I strongly support multilateral meetings… including with countries with which we do not share the same opinions” and “Not entering into a debate with countries with which we do not agree within multilateral organizations involves a tremendous risk.” He also defended the decision on pragmatic grounds, suggesting that the election should have proceeded, as usual, without a vote in this type of situation where Saudi Arabia was running unopposed because “Western countries are far from holding a majority at the UN, and this may end up making it so that we are no longer elected to organizations of this type.” At the same time, he expressed that “Belgium is in no way pleased with the election of Saudi Arabia onto this commission.” Deputy Prime Minister Alexander de Croo did not disclose Belgium’s vote, but appeared surprised and said that he would not have voted in favor of Saudi Arabia.
On April 27, 2017, the government took a different tone. Prime Minister Charles Michel said he regretted the vote and that: “If we could do it again and if it was possible to proceed with a political assessment at the government level, I of course would have pleaded against a favorable vote.” He also reportedly called for the resignation of Foreign Minister Reynders over his handling of the matter. For his part, Foreign Minister Reynders said that he wants to change Belgium’s procedure for voting for candidates at the UN.

See:

UK
As of April 29, 2017, after the Belgian Prime Minister apologized, the UK Foreign Office still refused to disclose how it voted, as reported by The Independent.
AUSTRALIA
In Australia, the government also dodged the question, as reported in the news on April 25 and 26, 2017.

The New Daily, a major source for online news in Australia, quoted extensively from UN Watch’s online statement about the absurdity of the vote. The article also quoted a separate statement from Hillel Neuer: “Australia is not responsible for the fact that the Asian group put up no other candidates, but it could and should have voted against Saudi Arabia, and should have convinced its allies to do the same.”
Australia Broadcasting Corporation, Australia’s national public broadcaster, also published the story noting that former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark responded to UN Watch’s Hillel Neuer on Twitter defending the vote: “It’s important to support those in the country who are working for change for women,” she said.
The government responds: A spokeswoman for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade refused to disclose Australia’s vote, saying: “Places on the Commission on the Status of Women are allocated according to regional groupings.”

SAUDI REGIME REACTS
On April 26, 2017, Saudi Arabia went on the defensive in responding to the media and political maelstrom:

In an Op-ed by the Saudi Ambassador to Norway published in NRK, Norway’s largest media outlet: “Saudi women are not oppressed. It’s not Norway’s problem that Saudi women cannot drive.”
The Saudi Arabian government’s Bureau of International Communication and Media took to its twitter account, which it had used only sporadically before, with several tweets attacking France 24’s news coverage, claiming France 24 got the facts about Saudi women’s rights wrong.

The post Calls for Belgian FM to Resign as Saudi-gate also roils Sweden, Ireland, Norway – Exposed by UN Watch appeared first on UN Watch.

Saudi ambassador to Norway defends misogynistic Saudi laws, slams treatment of Norwegian women

unwatch — Thu, 27 Apr 2017 12:33:51 +0000

Op-ed in Norwegian newspaper NRK by Saudi Ambassador Esam Abid Al Thagafi, April 26, 2017, translated by UN Watch.

A Distant Reality about Saudi Arabia

It is not Norway’s problem that Saudi Arabian women are not allowed to drive a car.

Photo: Fayez Nureldin / AFP
There has been a lot of discussion among politicians in Norway about whether or not Norway voted to have Saudi Arabia be a member of the UN Commission on the Status of Women, and many have branded the country to be the “worst place in the world for women.” By virtue of my position as an ambassador and citizen of Saudi Arabia, it is extremely important that we correct the partly misleading and nonfactual description of the situation of Saudi women’s rights from an Arab and Muslim perspective.

Male guardianship

As you know, the state religion of Saudi Arabia is Islam and Bedouin culture is still the country’s prevailing culture. The reason that women are subject to a male guardian is to create safety for women, rather than to deprive women of their freedom and independence. In Saudi Arabia, women cannot drive, but instead, they have private drivers who drive them wherever they want.
This is to take care of women in a country characterized by a Bedouin culture, where those who stray from tradition and culture are considered “bad” people and subject to punishment by society. This is the unfortunate way of thinking, and therefore there is a need for laws and regulations that ensure fewer problems in society. The West ignores the cultural differences and directs its criticism against the state rather than against the culture. One must understand that culture cannot be changed in a short period of time. It takes very long time for any change to happen.

Saudi women are spoiled

Contrary to what is common in Norwegian culture, Saudi women do not share expenses with their husbands. It is the man who assumes full financial responsibility, even if the woman works and earns as much as him.
Saudi women can freely go out one their own. Saudi women also have maids, so the idea that Saudi women are oppressed and are created to serve and satisfy the man is completely wrong. In fact, it is quite the opposite. It is the man who must pay for food, drink, housing expenses, clothes, makeup, and everything the woman might need. Even if the woman works and earns money, her husband cannot require anything from her. It is entirely up to the woman what she will use the money for.

“Women are subjected to a male guardian for the purpose of creating security for women.”

More and more women are beginning a career in the workplace. Five years ago there were only 46,000 women who worked in the private sector. Today there are over 560,000. 23 percent of the workforce are women. This is a significant increase from a few years back, and the government aims to increase the proportion to 30 percent by 2030.
30 Saudi women have taken seats in Saudi Arabia’s parliament (Shurar Council). A large percentage of Saudi women are highly educated, and those who work receive the same salaries as men.
Women may also refuse to marry. In Saudi Arabia, women have the right to leave the country to study or work. More and more Saudi women are traveling abroad and staying by themselves without a guardian for several months, without any consequences. They socialize, get to know people and make friends that are both male and female.

Different views on women’s rights

As mentioned earlier, Saudi Arabia is characterized by the religion of Islam, in addition to a Bedouin culture, which makes Western influence problematic. From the perspective of Saudi women, Western women are not a good role model. In Saudi Arabia, Bedouin culture means it is a sign of respect and dignity to cover yourself. It protects the woman from the evil eye, and especially from a man’s desire and sexual fantasy. Another feature of the Bedouin culture is that the man pays for everything. Saudi women do not view it as polite for costs to be shared between a couple.
Those who criticize the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia see the matter from a Western perspective. There are many young, Western-oriented Saudis with education from abroad who want change, but the majority of Saudi women do not think there is a need for major change.

“Saudi women can freely go out alone.”

It may seem incomprehensible that the West tries to demand something that most people in Saudi Arabia do not want. Why should you fight for the rights of others in another country with a different culture and religion? It is not Norway’s problem that Saudi women cannot drive a car.
If someone from the West embraces the close relationship between religion, identity, and culture of Saudi Arabia, they will realize that social problems will occur if women are allowed to drive or to be completely independent. When speaking about women’s rights in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, remember that it is a culture in which there is a deeply-rooted belief that the man is responsible for the woman.

Discrimination Against Women in Norway

In Norway, there is a long way to go before equal pay between men and women is realized. Statistics Norway (SSB) show that men on average earn 161,400 kroner more than women. (Kristin Egge-Hoveid, responsible for this statistical overview at SSB, believes this gap will shrink, but it will take time.)
A study from the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) shows that women work more hours per week than men, but earn far less. According to VG, which has received figures from the Norwegian Tax Directorate, more than 817 people in Norway live at a secret address for fear of being seriously injured or killed by male family members. They live on the so-called Code 6, which means that their identity is completely erased from all records.

“Social problems will occur if women are allowed to drive or to be completely independent.”

There is no country in the world where women are not discriminated against because of their gender. According to a World Bank study, violence against women between ages 15 to 44 represents a global health threat in line with diseases such as AIDS and cancer.
The statistics clearly show that the relationship between gender, discrimination and violations of social, political, civil, cultural and economic rights is overwhelming and universal. Some Norwegian politicians are so keen on their own freedom of expression that they forget to listen to those they criticize.
All common decency is set aside when they publish their own writings.
My advice to Norwegian politicians is to visit my country to see how well we are doing. They should show more respect to those they criticize.
Perhaps they should also focus on the challenges in Norway, rather than in Saudi Arabia.

The post Saudi ambassador to Norway defends misogynistic Saudi laws, slams treatment of Norwegian women appeared first on UN Watch.

Norway speaks out against dictators controlling UN

zadmin — Mon, 27 Oct 2014 10:20:35 +0000

Last week, at the 2014 Oslo Freedom Forum, the annual meeting of human rights and democracy activists from around the world, Bård Glad Pedersen, Norway’s State Secretary for Foreign Affairs, had very strong words in support of human rights defenders and against dictatorships. He pointed out how autocratic regimes coordinate at the UN to undermine human rights, something that also hurts confidence in the UN, as he said.
Below is this rare excerpt coming from a European democracy, admitting the sad reality of the UN Human Rights Council which UN Watch consistently fights to expose.

We need to defend those who bravely stand up to protect human rights. We must show that the world is watching. We advocate the importance of protection of human rights defenders in the UN. We support the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders. We support individuals, organizations and networks that are promoting human rights for all. We support security training and capacity building but I think we can do more and we must do more.
The fundamentals for protecting and promoting human rights are largely in place today. However, the gap between commitment on one hand and reality on the ground on the other hand is unacceptable. I think it is important that we recognize that the international system to promote and protect human rights is not equipped to address all these challenges fully and adequately.
In the UN, states with bad human rights records are actively working to undermine human rights and they are building alliances among themselves. This threatens human rights and also confidence in the UN. The answer is not to cave in, the answer is to respond forcefully. I believe it is even more important that we, we who believe in human rights, are active, committed and visible within the system and that we actively advocate the right of civil society to be heard in these forums. To promote human rights, we must work multilaterally in the UN and must work to strengthen the system. We must work regionally through the Council of Europe and support similar institutions in other regions of the world. We must work bilaterally, address issues, share concerns and build alliances across geographies.
The most rewarding and perhaps important part of my job is to meet human rights defenders. Sometimes part of the importance is that it is visible for totalitarian regimes that we meet. Other times, I am asked not to talk about the meetings because it would increase risks for the brave people who share their stories. The meetings are valuable because it gives insight and inspiration to continue also our efforts. Your strong voices and bravery makes a powerful impression.

The post Norway speaks out against dictators controlling UN appeared first on UN Watch.

Issue 283: Video: UNW on CNN’s Backstory * Upcoming Events in Oslo, New York, Geneva, Cincinnati, Cleveland, DC, Toronto, London

unwatch — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 09:55:49 +0000

Click here for video

___________________

Upcoming UN Watch Speaking Events

UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer is scheduled to speak at the following upcoming events:

· Oslo, Norway, March 24 – Briefing to the Norwegian Parliament’s Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence; Address to Oslo Symposium; Lecture at University of Oslo.

· New York City, March 27 – Fifth Avenue Synagogue, Sunday breakfast lecture, 9:30 AM. Click here for info. To RSVP: (212) 838-2122 or melanie@5as.org.

· Philadelphia, March 28 – Jewish Funders Network (by invitation only)

· Geneva, April 5-6 – UN Watch’s 18^th Anniversary Gala Dinner, and International Conference on “Lawfare and Durban III.” To attend, click here. Featuring: Amb. Alfred H. Moses, Chair of UN Watch; John Mann, British MP, Chair of UK Parliamentary Committee Against Anti-Semitism; Pilar Rahola, Journalist, former Spanish MP; Amb. Aharon Leshno-Yaar, Permanent Representative of Israel to the UN in Geneva;Amb. Daniel Carmon, Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Trevor Norwitz, Partner at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz; Prof. Gerald Steinberg, NGO Monitor; David Hirsh, Engage; Simon Deng, Human rights activist, former slave from Sudan; Dr. Richard Prasquier, President of the CRIF; Anne Herzberg, NGO Monitor; Brooke Goldstein, The Lawfare Project; David Schoen, Attorney for Unterberg v. Jimmy Carter, the class action complaint re: “Palestine: Peace not Apartheid”; Gabriel Latner, Cambridge law student and UN Watch intern.

· Cincinnati, April 12 – AIPAC Cincinnati Annual Event. For tickets, click here

· Cleveland, April 13 – Community Briefing, AIPAC. To RSVP: jwynes@aipac.org

· Washington, D.C., May 22-24 – AIPAC Policy Conference 2011

· Toronto, May 26 – Emunah 2011 Annual Dinner

· Geneva, June 1-14 – U.N. Human Rights Council plenary debates, 17^th session

· London, June 19-20 – European Council of WIZO Federations

The post Issue 283: Video: UNW on CNN’s Backstory * Upcoming Events in Oslo, New York, Geneva, Cincinnati, Cleveland, DC, Toronto, London appeared first on UN Watch.

Issue 266: 40 NGOs Urge U.N. Rights Chief to Attend Oslo Nobel Ceremony and Show Support for Chinese Dissident

unwatch — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 08:09:51 +0000

40 NGOs Urge U.N. Rights Chief to Attend Oslo Nobel Ceremony and Show Support for Chinese Dissident

GENEVA, December 10, 2010 – An international coalition of 40 human rights and non-governmental organizations appealed today to U.N. rights chief Navi Pillay to reverse her decision to skip Friday’s Nobel award ceremony for imprisoned Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo.

“We urge the High Commissioner to go to Oslo, attend the award ceremony, and convene a press conference that will spotlight the plight of the 1.3 billion Chinese citizens who are systematically denied the basic guarantees of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” said the statement.

Led by the Swiss-based rights group UN Watch, the signatories include the World Movement for Democracy, SOS Racisme of France, and activist organizations from India, Venezuela and Liberia.

“The world spotlight in Oslo tomorrow will be exceptional — it’s a golden opportunity that the U.N. should not squander,” said UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer.

UN Watch has worked closely with Yang Jianli, the exiled Chinese dissident representing Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo’s family, whose open letter yesterday strongly criticized the U.N.’s absence. Yang was a keynote speaker in April at the Geneva Summit on Human Rights and Democracy, organized by UN Watch and 25 other human rights NGOs. In July, UN Watch worked with Yang’s Sparrow Initiative to demand justice for the forced evictees of the Shanghai World Expo.

The full NGO appeal follows below.

Joint NGO Appeal for United Nations to Show Solidarity With
Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Liu Xiaobo, Human Rights Hero of China

10 December 2010

The undersigned human rights and non-governmental organizations pay tribute to jailed Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo on his being selected to receive the Nobel Peace Prize award.

We regret that, as claimed by China, 18 nations are supporting its boycott of the award ceremony tomorrow in Oslo. We fully reject China’s attempt to describe this courageous champion of human rights as “subversive and criminal,” and its denunciation of the award as an “obscenity”. On the contrary, no award could be more fitting on international Human Rights Day.

We further regret to learn that the Norwegian Nobel Committee confirmed that U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay has also declined to attend, as reported by Radio Australia.

We urge the High Commissioner to go to Oslo, attend the award ceremony, and convene a press conference that will spotlight the plight of the 1.3 billion Chinese citizens who are systematically denied the basic guarantees of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Sincerely,

Hillel C. Neuer
Executive Director
United Nations Watch
Switzerland

Art Kaufman
Director
World Movement for Democracy
United States

Tashi Albertini
President
Associazone TicinoTibet
Switzerland

Abdurashid Abdulle Abikar
Chairman
Center for Youth and Democracy
Somalia

Nguyên Lê Nhân Quyên
Vietnamese League for Human Rights in Switzerland

Ted Brooks
Executive Director
Committee for Peace and Development Advocacy
Liberia

Benjamin Abtan
SOS Racisme

Bernard Schalscha
Secrétaire général
Collectif Urgence Darfour

Ulrich Delius
Asia Desk
Society for Threatened Peoples
Germany

Shomik Chaudhuri
Vice President
Institute of International Social Development
India

Carlos E. Tinoco
Consorcio Desarrollo y Justicia, A.C.
Venezuela

Peter Hesse
Director, Fondation Peter Hesse (www.solidarity.org)
Germany

Logan Maurer
Regional manager
International Christian Concern (www.persecution.org)
United States

Dr. Theodor Rathgeber
Forum Human Rights
Germany

Rene Wadlow
Representative to the UN, Geneva
Association of World Citizens
Switzerland

Natalia Taubina
Director
Public Verdict Foundation
Russia

Sylvia G. Iriondo
President
Mothers and Women against Repression (MAR por Cuba)

Nataliya Gourjii
Executive Director
Charitable Foundation ROKADA
Ukraine

Elena Bevilacqua
Director of Headquarters
International Union of Notaries (U.I.N.L.)

John Suarez
International Secretary
Directorio Democratico Cubano

Omar Lopez
Human Rights Director
The Cuban American National Foundation
United States

Klaus Netter
Main Representative, UN Office in Geneva
Coordinating Board of Jewish Organizations
Switzerland

Volodymyr Yavorskyy
Executive Director
Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union

Jean Stoner
NGO Representative
Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur
United States

Zohra Yusuf
Council Member
Human Rights Commission of Pakistan

Heng-Hao (Leo) Chang
Secretary General
International Federation of Medical Students’ Associations

Sharon Gustafson
President
International Council of Jewish Women

Dr. Yael Danieli
Senior Representative to the United Nations
International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies

Thomas Leys
President
International Federation of Liberal Youth

Do Hoang Diem
Chairman
Viet Tan
Vietnam

Alim A. Seytoff
Vice-President
Uyghur American Association

Bhawani Shanker Kusum
Secretary and Executive Director
Gram Bharati Samiti
India

Francois Garaï
Representative
World Union of Progressive Judaism

Mamadi Kaba
President
RADDHO
Guinee

Dieudonné Zognong
Fondation Humanus
Cameroon

Dickson Ntwiga
Executive Director
Solidarity House International

Amina Bouayach
President
Moroccan Organization for Human Rights (OMDH)

Amaya Valcarcel
International Advocacy Coordinator
Jesuit Refugee Service
Italy

The post Issue 266: 40 NGOs Urge U.N. Rights Chief to Attend Oslo Nobel Ceremony and Show Support for Chinese Dissident appeared first on UN Watch.