Each year, the UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) meets to further the empowerment of women worldwide. REAL Women sent a team of six representatives to attend this year’s meeting from March 1 – 12, 2010.
The meeting brought together more than 3,400 participants, representing over 460 non-government organizations (NGO’s) from 138 countries for the purpose of reviewing the 15-year implementation of the Platform for Action agreed upon at the UN’s Women’s Conference held in Beijing in 1995.
The combatants in this battle of words, psychology and endurance, were, on one side, in over-whelming numbers, the hardline feminist NGO’s and State delegates who were protected with a strong armor provided by the UN bureaucracy. The latter placed aggressive, hard, impatient women to lead the meetings; readily provided access to meeting rooms, and, in general, provided all that was necessary to assist the feminist activists.
On the other side, in much smaller numbers, were the defenders of life and family, whose State delegations and NGO’s had as their only armor, their courage and determination to resist provisions in the text which would introduce a global progressive, Marxist world. The UN bureaucracy was not available to assist them; meeting rooms were scarce, UN computers were tied up, etc. That is, pro-life efforts were not made easier by the UN bureaucracy.
There were two main resolutions at this meeting, which became the bone of contention. The European Union (EU) put forward a resolution on HIV/AIDS. This was of importance because this resolution referred to another document entitled "The International Guidelines on HIV/AIDS and Human Rights", which contained expressions that support abortion, same-sex marriage and sexual rights. Canada supported the inclusion of this resolution in the text. Fortunately, during negotiations, the HIV/AIDS resolution was removed from the final draft.
The second and main resolution was on maternal mortality and was put forward by US President Obama’s delegation. This resolution was very deliberate, since it had also been advanced in the 2009 annual report of the World Health Organization (WHO) which claimed maternal mortality was one of the top ten global causes of death for women, which list included cancer, accidents, etc. This was not a correct statement. WHO included this false information for the purpose of promoting abortion, alleging it was "necessary" to reduce maternal mortality. That was also the implication behind the US maternal mortality resolution at the CSW.
That is, the U.S. hoped that this resolution would gain ground on the ideological battlefield by including references to “sexual and reproductive rights” in the text, ie. to include the right to unlimited access to contraception and abortion.
The delegates favouring the resolution to include “sexual and reproductive rights” had an amicable relationship with the chair who smiled upon them each time she gave them the floor. Those delegates who opposed the abortion / contraception language were given the floor with an air of impatience. These few brave nations included Poland, Ireland, Malta, the Holy See, Costa Rica, Chile, St. Lucia, Iran, and Syria, among others.
Dr. Alexandra Colen, a member of the Belgian Parliament, who was a member of the Belgian delegation at this conference, is also pro-life and pro-family, and therefore did not belong to the progressive Marxist “in-crowd” at the conference. It was her first opportunity to observe the UN at work. She stated that:
I was witnessing a chapter of the Marxist push to reshape the world which triumphed in the West with the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 1970s. The Marxist agenda, however, is one of global scope and its proponents will not rest until they have eradicated every last remnant of pre-sexual-revolution morality. Since the 1960s they have acquired powerful instruments to achieve this aim. They manipulate the complicated and non-transparent bureaucracy of the UN (they fondly refer to it as “the system”), which exerts powerful pressure on the governments of the world. Through this bureaucracy they aggressively advance their cause, initiating attacks on the core-values of family-based societies, especially the Judeo-Christian values that have shaped Western civilization, at every opportunity.
She commented on the maternal health resolution:
This March, in New York, the issue was not the plight of ill and dying mothers, but the promotion of a general acceptance of abortion as a form of healthcare, through UN texts which are binding for the member states.
Canada at the UN CSW
Canada was at the forefront supporting the US resolution to have “sexual and reproductive” rights included in the text of the maternal mortality resolution.
Further, the Canadian delegation:
Supported the proposal that the HIV/AIDS resolution be included in the text;
Supported that "unsafe abortion" be included in the text. This expression implies that abortions, when "safe", are acceptable and would be free of any physical or psychological risks. It ignores the rights of the unborn child;
Supported the expression “young girls” be included in the resolution on maternal mortality. The purpose of including this term was to be able to use it in future negotiations to achieve independence for young girls from their families on sexual and abortion rights, eliminating parental consent.
At the end of this battle, the expression “sexual and reproductive rights” was included in the text, but a number of states, including Poland, Malta, Chile, St. Lucia, Iran, Syria, Qatar and The Holy See made statements, stating expressly "that sexual and reproductive rights" and "health services" in the text should not be misinterpreted to include abortion. Canada, of course, did not make such a statement, since it supported the expression being included in the text. |
