US House Democrats Gut Human Rights Law in Bid for New UNFPA Funding

By C-FAM Staff

     (NEW YORK – C-FAM) In a vote on Wednesday, the US House of Representatives International Relations Committee sought to significantly weaken a long-standing US human rights law in order to make the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) eligible for restoration of its US funding. Twenty-two Democrats and one Republican voting in favor of the UNFPA amendment.

     The law, called the Kemp-Kasten Human Rights Provision, makes it illegal for the United States to sponsor programs that involve "coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization." In the new amendment, introduced by Congressmen Joseph Crowley (D-NY), this human rights standard would no longer apply to UNFPA. Instead, UNFPA would only be held accountable if it "directly" coerced women.

     This move was necessary for US proponents of UNFPA because the Bush administration has already determined that UNFPA indirectly supports forced abortion in China. In July, 2002 Secretary of State Colin Powell announced that "UNFPA's support of, and involvement in, China's population-planning activities allows the Chinese government to implement more effectively its program of coercive abortion….In light of the Kemp-Kasten amendment, no funds…may be provided to UNFPA…"

     What is more, evidence continues to mount that coercion exists in the Chinese counties in which UNFPA operates. The latest US State Department report for China, released in March, notes that "From 1998 through 2002, the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA) conducted a 4-year pilot project in 32 counties…. However, these counties retained the birth limitation policy, including the requirement that couples employ effective birth control methods, and enforced it through other means, such as social compensation fees."

     According to the Crowley amendment, "the term 'directly supports or participates in coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization' means knowingly and intentionally working with a purpose to continue, advance, or expand the practice of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization, or playing a primary and essential role in a coercive or involuntary aspect of a country's family planning program." Presumably, all other involvement in coercive practices, such as UNFPA's work in China, would be deemed "indirect," and therefore allowable.

     Some Republicans reacted with anger towards these tactics. Congressman Christopher Smith (R-NJ) stated that "It is despicable to me that proponents of this amendment are so extreme in their support for UNFPA that they are trying to weaken a 17-year-old human rights law. Instead of seeking to weaken the law, they should help women who have been victimized and pressure the UNFPA to divest itself of programs that rely on coercion. Instead of lowering the bar on human rights they should be trying to get UNFPA to increase their efforts to meet fundamental human rights standards.

     " In a press release, Congressman Crowley praised UNFPA's population control activities, stating that "Restoring US funding for UNFPA programs is crucial…to addressing rapid population growth." His amendment seeks $100 million for UNFPA over the next two years.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter