The ugly face of human rights

IN this age of globalisation, we are tired of hearing the term "human rights." And the northern hemisphere, which is more educated, developed and rich, is the leading campaigner of human rights. By now we all know what human rights means. What many of us may not know is the very hypocrisy in human rights, and the politics of human rights. How has it come to this stage? Let us try to know that.
Former Irish president and UN human rights commissioner, Mary Robinson, said in 2002: "I am often asked what is the most serious form of human rights violation in the world to-day, and my reply is consistent: extreme poverty."
Former UN secretary general Kofi Annan said: "The universal declaration of human rights has, at best, a hollow ring, wherever families eke out an existence on less than a dollar a day, or children die for lack of basic yet life saving care." The United Nations General Assembly, through Resolution 5/146, affirmed that poverty posed the single greatest threat to the survival of the greatest numbers of human beings, and that it was a violation of human dignity, rights and well-being.
Since that resolution, rich countries have been trying to save their faces by indulging in charity. But this small amount of charity could not go far to reduce poverty, except for giving some credit and maneuvering power to rich countries over the poor. The UN and NGOs should realise that poverty, which is an extreme violation of human rights, cannot fall under charity work, and that fighting poverty must be a prime obligation for the rich.
Against this background, in August 2006, a UN sub-commission for the promotion and protection of human rights adopted guiding principles for the first time in the history of UN. It proposed an international law document which would consider the fight against extreme poverty as an obligation for all states.
The fact is that nearly 24,000 people die every day because of extreme poverty, and the resulting lack of access to nutrition, clean drinking water and basic medical care. Accordingly, in one hour from this moment, the world will witness the death of another 1000 people. To make a stark comparison, this toll is the equivalent of a passenger jet carrying 500 people crashing every 30 minutes. And, in this case, three out of four of the victim "passengers" are children of age five or under.
Again, more than a billion people, one in every six human beings, still live on less than a dollar a day and do not have the means to stay alive in the face of chronic hunger and disease. In other words, it is poverty that kills. A single bite from a malaria-bearing mosquito is enough to end a child's life for want of a mosquito net or treatment worth $1.
The director of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), Jack Deof, said: "If only 3% of world's yearly military expenditure could be reduced and utilised for development of agriculture and food then a better life could be offered to 850 millions hungry human beings. Only in 2006, global military expenditure was $1.2 trillion. On the other hand, one country has spoiled food worth $100 billion, the fat people of the world spoiled food worth $20 billion. Given the above statistics, how it can be explained to the conscious people of the world that only $30 billion could not be collected for saving the lives of around 860 million poor human beings."
From the above statement of the FAO director, two realities of the present world have become clear. First, the extreme helplessness of the majority of human beings. Second, the extreme disparity between the rich and the poor. And both are the creation of the minority rich. The endless desire to accumulate wealth and comfort, the endless greed, and the extreme indifference of the rich towards the poor are pushing millions of poor human beings to their deaths. What can be more shameful and sad for human civilisation than endangering the lives of 1 billion human beings for want of food?
In a separate research, SIPR, a military research entity, showed that the top 100 weapon producers sold weapon worth $236 billion in 2003 only. And, to sell these weapons and earn money, many insecurities and wars are being stoked by the world powers. As a result, weapons worth $1 trillion are being purchased every year by various countries of the world. Against this, only $325 billion are being spent on agriculture every year.
Hence, even if world leaders cannot guarantee food for each human being, they have already ensured 2 bullets per head, and 1 deadly weapon for every 10 human beings. Hence, those who earn money out of weapons, pushing 1 billion human beings towards death, should not insult the words "human rights" by attaching their names to those words.
Even if we consider the meaning of human rights literally, these human rights campaigners will cut a sorry finger. Many a times, it has been found, world powers do not advocate for implementation of human rights for some issues and countries. Without elaborating, if some one looks at Palestine, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Guantanamo, this will be clear. All these instances demonstrate that protection of human rights has been embroiled in world politics and power.
All countries and people of the world, rich or poor, will have to pay a high price in failing to reduce poverty. It would be a tragedy -- above all for the world's poor -- but rich countries will not be immune to the consequences of failure. In an interdependent world, our shared prosperity and collective security depend critically on success in the war against poverty.
Poverty is the result of historical and contemporary politics. There is growing awareness of the yawning gap between rich and poor nations. As of 1999, according to a UN human development report, 200 richest people doubled their income in past four years to $1000 billion, and the 3 richest people have more assets than the total assets of the poorest 600 million people.
Poverty can only be eliminated if rich nations and the biggest international agencies and transnational corporations get together in promoting poverty alleviation policies like "Fighting poverty is not a charity but an obligation." Thereby, the ugly face of human right could be turned into a beautiful one.

S.M. Pervez is an analyst on international peace and conflicts.