Brussels, 04/02/2005 (Agence Europe) - The United States and the European Union are on the same wavelength when it comes to human rights in the world, but their practical approaches and their “tactics” for achieving the best possible result sometimes differ, as in Iran, Cuba or even China, Ambassador Michael G. Kozak told the press on Thursday. Mr Kozak is US acting Assistant Secretary of State for democracy and human rights in the world. He was at the head of a high level American delegation which met senior officials of the EU Troika on Wednesday, in Brussels, to prepare the forthcoming session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in Geneva (from 14 March to 22 April). “The United States and the European Union are natural allies” in combating human rights violations and in upholding democratic principles worldwide, Kozak said. “We share the same fundamental values but, in some specific areas, we do not have the same opinion” on how to best achieve our goals.
Mr Kozak cited the example of Iran, saying that dialogue has now broken down between Washington and Iran. The EU, on the other hand, has revived talks with Iran with a view to concluding a cooperation and trade agreement in the context of talks on Teheran's nuclear programme (see other article). Despite this, Washington supports all the European efforts towards Iran and trusts that they will be successful as far as the nuclear option and human rights go, Kozak said. “It is not always necessary for everyone to have a direct dialogue with people who oppress their population”, he said to explain US policy in Iran. The absence of official contacts with Teheran does not prevent Washington from supporting certain parts of Iran's civil society: on Thursday, a spokesperson of the State Department stressed in Washington that the aim of these contacts with Iranian dissidents is not, however, to provoke a change of regime in Iran. “The United States has also been very clear that we support the aspirations of the Iranian people for freedom, for the free expression of views, for their basic rights, including freedom of assembly, and that there is an unfortunate record by the government of acting against those freedoms (…) That's something that we shall speak out against”, the spokesperson said.
On the subject of Cuba, Americans also have a different “tactic” to that of the EU which has just suspended its diplomatic sanctions towards Fidel Castro's regime (see EUROPE of 1 February). “We have reservations about this move”, Kozak said.
China remains a country where human rights and respect of individual freedoms are still a problem, “but China is only one country in a series of problematic countries” whose situation will be discussed in Geneva during the session of the UN Commission on Human Rights. It is still not clear, however, if resolutions will be proposed in Geneva on China, Kozak said. In China, also, the American approach for improving the situation on the spot is different to the EU approach, as can be seen by the EU's intention to lift the arms embargo against China. “We continue to believe that lifting this embargo is not the right message to give the Chinese” and will not improve the human rights situation or democracy in China, or increase stability and security in the region, he explained.
Mr Kozak also stressed that the US Administration was “concerned” by democratic developments in Russia, as well as by the situation in Chechnya. If Russia wishes to be part of the international democratic community, it must also share and apply its democratic values, the US ambassador said.
Washington is also pressing for improving the democratic situation and human rights in Arab countries, including in “friendly countries” like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, Mr Kozak said. As long as the regimes of some Middle East countries remain “dictatorships” this will entail the frustration of the populations and permanent instability in the region. “We want to see change”, he stressed.
The situation in Darfur is ”horrendous” and the Sudan government is “behind” these crimes despite many promises made to the UN, the United States and the EU. “There is a very strong consensus that something has to be done” but there are still differences over how to do it. Thus, the EU supports the UN's idea that the authors of crimes should be brought before the International Criminal Court in The Hague, whereas the United States (which continues to describe the violations in Darfur as “genocide”) would like to take the matter before the UN Security Council.