T
|
he
Religious Consultation|
New York Times, March 3, 2005 United States
Drops Anti-Abortion Demand at U.N. Equality
Forum UNITED NATIONS, March 2 - The United States on Wednesday dropped its contentious demand for a change in a centerpiece document of a United Nations conference on equality that had plunged the three-day-old gathering of 6,000 women and government ministers into conflict. The meeting this week of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women was held to review progress since its world conference on equality 10 years ago in Beijing. The document was a one-page statement that delegates had prepared to reaffirm the closing declaration of the 1995 meeting. But the United States proposed an amendment with wording saying it would agree to the principles in the declaration only after "reaffirming that they do not create any new international human rights, and that they do not include the right to abortion." Adrienne Germain, the president of the International Women's Health Coalition, who was also a member of the United States delegation in Beijing, called the American action a "mischievous distraction" from the real business of the conference. She asserted that the Beijing statement was a nonbinding declaration, not a treaty, and that no part of it could be construed as creating new human rights or the right to abortion. "What the U.S. amendment does is to make a statement about what Beijing does not say," she said. On Wednesday, Taina Bien-Aimé, executive director of Equality Now, said it was "unconscionable that the United States would hijack this very important meeting to talk about this extremely narrow issue that, basically to use the term 'fundamental right to abortion' is nowhere in the text of the platform for action." Only two countries, Egypt and Qatar, backed the American amendment, and many others, including all 25 nations of the European Union, declared that they would not accept it. Faced with widespread opposition, Ambassador Ellen R. Sauerbrey, the leader of the United States delegation, told the delegates on Wednesday that it was now clear that the original Beijing documents "do not create rights or legally binding obligations on states under international law, including the right to abortion." She said, "We are pleased that so many other governments have indicated their agreement with this position, and we anticipate that we can now focus clearly on addressing the many urgent needs of women around the world." A senior American diplomat, who insisted that his name not be published, said the United States felt that it had accomplished its original objective in raising the issue and that no amendment would be needed. The vote on the statement is set for Friday. In 1995, the Beijing negotiators sought to avoid dissension over abortion by agreeing to treat it as a public health issue. The platform said it should be safe where it was legal, and criminal action should not be taken against women who had abortions. The Clinton administration, which backed abortion rights, signaled its support by sending Hillary Rodham Clinton to the conference. The American delegates this year are Ms. Sauerbrey, a former Republican candidate for Maryland governor; Susan B. Hirschmann, a former chief of staff to Representative Tom DeLay of Texas; Patricia P. Brister, a former chairman of the Louisiana Republican Party; and Janet Parshall, host of a faith-based radio talk show. Ms. Sauerbrey said the United States would issue a resolution seeking a crackdown on prostitution as a way to curb the trafficking of women and sex tourism, and one empowering women by changing inheritance laws and giving women access to credit and ownership powers. << New York Times -- 3/3/05 >>
Home About Us Newsletters News Archives Donate
|