Back to all interviews
Freedom Collection

Interviews with Nima Rashedan

Interviewed January 5, 2011

I think there was a huge debate among Iranian scholars, bloggers, and journalists on the role of the United Nations [UN] and, especially, the Committee for Human Rights in Geneva. And no one is denying that the UN can play a positive role.

But I was reading a lot of texts, which I think represent a very, very high proportion of Green Movement activists; and they were asking questions like: we had the Darfur crisis, and we had things in Tibet going on, we had things in Russia, in Africa, different places of the world; the very same Committee in Geneva spent one and a half years and was unable to have a single resolution in Darfur, where, during part of the time, 10,000 to 15,000 people were dying daily. And the very same council, in the very same period, had nine statements against Israel.

You may wonder why the Iranian public is talking about that. Because, I think there is this capacity to analyze the whole issue; and they can see that, perhaps having hope in that council in Geneva, which has always been compromised – it’s the council in which Saudi Arabia and Sudan and China are sometimes members of the Committee – this is not a very realistic hope for the UN and Human Rights Council in Geneva to come and condemn Iran as somebody who is violating human rights.

So, who are you going to ask? You want to ask China to vote against Iran or you want to ask Sudan against Iran? They knew that, unfortunately, the structure of the UN and the Human Rights Council is pretty politicized, and it’s ineffective – it’s a kind of playground between African and Arabic nations against the West and so on. And at least for the very short future, nothing great is going to come out of that for Iranian protestors.