Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Statements Commission on Human Rights
Default title
17 March 1998
Share
Fifty-fourth session of the Commission on Human Rights,
Geneva 16 March - 24 April 1998
Statement by H.E. Mr. Kamal Kharazi
Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran
on the occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Geneva, 17 March 1998
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
My heartfelt felicitations to you, Mr. Chairman. Your exceptional personal and professional qualifications and the role that you and your compatriots played in the long and painful struggle against the evil of racism in your country, testifies to a profoundly meritorious election.
It is also deeply gratifying for me to see here Mrs. Mary Robinson, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, whom I have had the pleasure to host during her recent visit in Tehran.
We are nearing the end of a century, which has been marked by perpetual contradictions and conflicts. Humanity has witnessed and experienced, in full contrast the prevalence of war and peace, repression and justice, brutality and compassion, intolerance and lenience, corruption and correctness, despotism and freedom, turmoil and serenity, sacrilege and sanctity. The human race has also been bewildered by the astonishing advent of science and technology which has enigmatically altered its view of the world and its style of life, and has effected its behavior with its definite power and peril.
Through all this, has emerged a heightened stage of awareness and rationality and a sharpened focus on man's nature and his material and spiritual needs and requirements. Utter divergence and incongruity, reminiscent and symbolic of a period of uncertainties, is at last, giving way to an era where mind and spirit can reconcile and man can retrieve and reestablish its real self. This century will be recognized, I believe, as a century which will lead to a more peaceful and just world for the proceeding generations.
This view, I admit, may be judged as excessively optimistic or even idealistic, It runs counter to, and challenges the epocalyptic view that civilizations are reaching a climax and that a showdown is imminent. I submit that a clash between civilizations may not be entirely discarded. But I assert that, that is a choice rather than destiny, and we need not and should not opt for that choice. We should, in that stead, resort to dialogue and strive to enhance understanding.
Few other areas are so revealing of this paradox as the unending debate on human rights and responsibilities. We are today commemorating the golden jubilee of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. There is reason for rejoice as the Declaration, along with numerous other valuable conventions, protocols and covenants, have contributed to rule-based international civil society where individuals are protected against the injustice inflicted by corrupt power.
Cruelty and abhorrent ruthlessness which had dominated a main part of contemporary history in various parts of the world and particularly in Europe, had to lead to preventive arrangements to curtail the recurrence of such atrocities. For this, the Declaration and other humanitarian and human rights instruments have, at times, been rightly called Eurocentric. But one cannot deny the positive influence that these norms have had in promoting and solidifying the rights of individuals and ensuring their observance.
Persuasive pursuit of human rights and fundamental freedoms has indeed helped improve global, regional and particular situations. It has also resulted in raising the human rights issues to the forefront of international agenda. Despots and dictators find it much harder to breach the rights of individuals today, than they did five decades ago. This is an outstanding achievement that we should appreciate and cherish. We should, at the same time, remain cognizant of differences and contrasting views which often tend towards the point of contention.
Human rights, during most of the cold war rivalry, was utilized as a political tool to lash out against opponents. Bloc formations and confrontations reigned as the leading powers persisted on accusing their rivals of violating human rights, while protecting themselves and their allies from slightest notions of criticism.
This, should have ended with the demise of the Cold War. But hopes of a better, less politicized approach to human rights faded as East-West rivalry was quickly replaced by the North-South divide. To bridge this divide, is the most significant challenge we should meet, at this historic juncture.
One side adopts an absolutist approach which contends any attempt to incorporate culture, history and religion into evaluation of human rights as detrimental to the fate of the Declaration. Relativism, it alleges, could yield to the dilution of human rights principles and to its eventual regression. The other side holds, that the Declaration is the product of Western mind and culture and is alien to their thought and tradition and particularly to those to the Orient.
One puts the emphasis on the rights of the individuals and the other on individuals' social responsibilities.
One holds the banner of civil and political rights, and the other raises the flag of economic and social rights.
One persists on rights, the other insists on morality.
...Accusations and counter-accusations ensue ceaselessly.
This unhealthy trend will not reverse if and while the two side remain entrenched in their positions. Intransigence breeds intransigence. Truth is that neither side holds the whole truth but merely a part of it.
-Human rights are absolute in their essence, but become relative in cognition;
-Rights and responsibilities are intertwined and complimentary rather than disparate and contradictory.
Economic and social rights are inseparable from civil and political rights as human rights are indivisible. Alleviation of poverty and provision of a decent standard of living requires as much attention and scrutiny as protection of freedom of thought and expression.
-Individual talents and abilities do not flourish in the absence of rights and societies disintegrate in the absence of morality. Fixation on Rousseau's purely contractual prescription and Calvinist's moralistic formatives are both extremities that alienate man from his inherent self. True prosperity lies in an equilibrium specific to each individual and society. -Occidental and oriental cultures can contribute to and learn from each other through interaction in lieu of counteraction.
These conclusions seem to form a simple and logical compromise between the two diametrically opposing views. But we should realize that they will not be easily arrived at. They require good will, open minds and hearts, flexibility and farsightedness. Above all, they demand continuous, persistent and systematic dialogue.
The Islamic World is particularly prepared for this exchange. As deliberations of the Tehran OIC Summit demonstrate, Islamic states are aware of their contributions to the Western culture and civilization and the contributions of the West. They firmly believe in upholding human rights while maintaining their allegiance to divinity and moral values. They uphold liberty, justice and faith as basic pillars of humanity, seek unity in diversity, and enjoin dignity, participation and dialogue. The Holy Qur'an is clear and explicit in this context. O you men! surely We have created you of a male and a female, and made you tribes and families that you may interact with one another; surely the most honorable of you with Allah is the one amongst you most pious; surely Allah is Knowing and Aware.
The sensible and balanced vision of the High Commissioner is highly reassuring in pursuance of a new and more positive trait. I note particularly her responsiveness to the need for enhanced understanding. In the current political settings it is difficult to foresee when and how revision of the Declaration may take place. But it is possible to seek for an improved appreciation of its contents which converges views stemming from various cultural, historical and religious backgrounds into a common interpretation; thus elevating the Declaration to true universality.
We recommend, that the High Commissioner invite commentaries on the Universal Declaration on Human Rights as a prelude to dialogue and encourage all states and organizations to join this exercise.
The human rights dialogue remains an integral and important component of a broader exchange and interchange within and between civilizations. Humanity will benefit by embracing each others' virtues and rejecting each others' vice. The confused man of twentieth century -- who learned so much about his universe but seemed alienated in that process -- may hence find his lost identity and thence establish lasting inner peace and peace
with its kind.
Geneva 16 March - 24 April 1998
Statement by H.E. Mr. Kamal Kharazi
Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran
on the occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Geneva, 17 March 1998
In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
My heartfelt felicitations to you, Mr. Chairman. Your exceptional personal and professional qualifications and the role that you and your compatriots played in the long and painful struggle against the evil of racism in your country, testifies to a profoundly meritorious election.
It is also deeply gratifying for me to see here Mrs. Mary Robinson, the High Commissioner for Human Rights, whom I have had the pleasure to host during her recent visit in Tehran.
We are nearing the end of a century, which has been marked by perpetual contradictions and conflicts. Humanity has witnessed and experienced, in full contrast the prevalence of war and peace, repression and justice, brutality and compassion, intolerance and lenience, corruption and correctness, despotism and freedom, turmoil and serenity, sacrilege and sanctity. The human race has also been bewildered by the astonishing advent of science and technology which has enigmatically altered its view of the world and its style of life, and has effected its behavior with its definite power and peril.
Through all this, has emerged a heightened stage of awareness and rationality and a sharpened focus on man's nature and his material and spiritual needs and requirements. Utter divergence and incongruity, reminiscent and symbolic of a period of uncertainties, is at last, giving way to an era where mind and spirit can reconcile and man can retrieve and reestablish its real self. This century will be recognized, I believe, as a century which will lead to a more peaceful and just world for the proceeding generations.
This view, I admit, may be judged as excessively optimistic or even idealistic, It runs counter to, and challenges the epocalyptic view that civilizations are reaching a climax and that a showdown is imminent. I submit that a clash between civilizations may not be entirely discarded. But I assert that, that is a choice rather than destiny, and we need not and should not opt for that choice. We should, in that stead, resort to dialogue and strive to enhance understanding.
Few other areas are so revealing of this paradox as the unending debate on human rights and responsibilities. We are today commemorating the golden jubilee of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. There is reason for rejoice as the Declaration, along with numerous other valuable conventions, protocols and covenants, have contributed to rule-based international civil society where individuals are protected against the injustice inflicted by corrupt power.
Cruelty and abhorrent ruthlessness which had dominated a main part of contemporary history in various parts of the world and particularly in Europe, had to lead to preventive arrangements to curtail the recurrence of such atrocities. For this, the Declaration and other humanitarian and human rights instruments have, at times, been rightly called Eurocentric. But one cannot deny the positive influence that these norms have had in promoting and solidifying the rights of individuals and ensuring their observance.
Persuasive pursuit of human rights and fundamental freedoms has indeed helped improve global, regional and particular situations. It has also resulted in raising the human rights issues to the forefront of international agenda. Despots and dictators find it much harder to breach the rights of individuals today, than they did five decades ago. This is an outstanding achievement that we should appreciate and cherish. We should, at the same time, remain cognizant of differences and contrasting views which often tend towards the point of contention.
Human rights, during most of the cold war rivalry, was utilized as a political tool to lash out against opponents. Bloc formations and confrontations reigned as the leading powers persisted on accusing their rivals of violating human rights, while protecting themselves and their allies from slightest notions of criticism.
This, should have ended with the demise of the Cold War. But hopes of a better, less politicized approach to human rights faded as East-West rivalry was quickly replaced by the North-South divide. To bridge this divide, is the most significant challenge we should meet, at this historic juncture.
One side adopts an absolutist approach which contends any attempt to incorporate culture, history and religion into evaluation of human rights as detrimental to the fate of the Declaration. Relativism, it alleges, could yield to the dilution of human rights principles and to its eventual regression. The other side holds, that the Declaration is the product of Western mind and culture and is alien to their thought and tradition and particularly to those to the Orient.
One puts the emphasis on the rights of the individuals and the other on individuals' social responsibilities.
One holds the banner of civil and political rights, and the other raises the flag of economic and social rights.
One persists on rights, the other insists on morality.
...Accusations and counter-accusations ensue ceaselessly.
This unhealthy trend will not reverse if and while the two side remain entrenched in their positions. Intransigence breeds intransigence. Truth is that neither side holds the whole truth but merely a part of it.
-Human rights are absolute in their essence, but become relative in cognition;
-Rights and responsibilities are intertwined and complimentary rather than disparate and contradictory.
Economic and social rights are inseparable from civil and political rights as human rights are indivisible. Alleviation of poverty and provision of a decent standard of living requires as much attention and scrutiny as protection of freedom of thought and expression.
-Individual talents and abilities do not flourish in the absence of rights and societies disintegrate in the absence of morality. Fixation on Rousseau's purely contractual prescription and Calvinist's moralistic formatives are both extremities that alienate man from his inherent self. True prosperity lies in an equilibrium specific to each individual and society. -Occidental and oriental cultures can contribute to and learn from each other through interaction in lieu of counteraction.
These conclusions seem to form a simple and logical compromise between the two diametrically opposing views. But we should realize that they will not be easily arrived at. They require good will, open minds and hearts, flexibility and farsightedness. Above all, they demand continuous, persistent and systematic dialogue.
The Islamic World is particularly prepared for this exchange. As deliberations of the Tehran OIC Summit demonstrate, Islamic states are aware of their contributions to the Western culture and civilization and the contributions of the West. They firmly believe in upholding human rights while maintaining their allegiance to divinity and moral values. They uphold liberty, justice and faith as basic pillars of humanity, seek unity in diversity, and enjoin dignity, participation and dialogue. The Holy Qur'an is clear and explicit in this context. O you men! surely We have created you of a male and a female, and made you tribes and families that you may interact with one another; surely the most honorable of you with Allah is the one amongst you most pious; surely Allah is Knowing and Aware.
The sensible and balanced vision of the High Commissioner is highly reassuring in pursuance of a new and more positive trait. I note particularly her responsiveness to the need for enhanced understanding. In the current political settings it is difficult to foresee when and how revision of the Declaration may take place. But it is possible to seek for an improved appreciation of its contents which converges views stemming from various cultural, historical and religious backgrounds into a common interpretation; thus elevating the Declaration to true universality.
We recommend, that the High Commissioner invite commentaries on the Universal Declaration on Human Rights as a prelude to dialogue and encourage all states and organizations to join this exercise.
The human rights dialogue remains an integral and important component of a broader exchange and interchange within and between civilizations. Humanity will benefit by embracing each others' virtues and rejecting each others' vice. The confused man of twentieth century -- who learned so much about his universe but seemed alienated in that process -- may hence find his lost identity and thence establish lasting inner peace and peace
with its kind.