163. Editorial Note
In July 1978, the Working Group on Communications of the United Nations Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities received a communication from the Memphis, Tennessee, Committee on Human Rights, the Bridgewater Shelby County NAACP, and Church of Human Development alleging that African-American residents of Memphis and Shelby County had been subject to discrimination by the Memphis police and denied due process. Such an allegation meant that the United States was cited as a “gross and consistent” violator of human rights under ECOSOC 1503 procedures. The National Security Council Global Issues Cluster’s August 30 evening report noted that the Working Group voted unanimously to cite the United States for violations. In the report, National Security Council Staff member Leslie Denend indicated that the United States, the Soviet Union, Colombia, Nigeria, and Pakistan comprised the Working Group membership, adding: “Ambassador Carter, our expert on the group, is the only member who carries such a direct link to his government and who is not able to follow developments in this forum full-time because he is our current Ambassador to Liberia. Once the current situation is resolved, we should give this staffing arrangement a careful review.
“State is hard at work preparing our case for the Sub-Commission on September 11. According to Mezvinsky who sat in on these proceedings last year, even if Ambassador Carter reverses his position and makes a strong presentation on behalf of the US, the Sub-Commission is likely to forward the working group recommendation to the full Commission. The problem is that it will be very difficult to turn around a unanimous working group recommendation. (Even Argentina only received a 3–2 vote.)
“All the outcomes I envision from this entire process have negative consequences for the President and the policy. Although we have been trying to strengthen the UNHRC process, we should be prepared to step sharply away from it if the Sub-Commission cites the US and moves the case to the full Commission.” (Carter Library, National Security Affairs, Staff Material, Global Issues—Oplinger/Bloomfield Subject File, Box 36, Evening Reports: 7–8/78)
In telegram 221106 to Geneva, August 30, the Department of State responded to the complaint, received in the Department on July 26, terming the citation against the United States as “surprising” and indicating that a formal response to the Working Group, then meeting in Geneva, would be forthcoming. (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D780354–1098) In telegram 224200 to Geneva, September 2, the Department indicated that the response would be sent via [Page 527] separate telegram and requested that the Mission delay transmission of the report until September 6, as Department officials planned to discuss the substance of the report with Department of Justice officials on September 5. (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D780360–0276) Telegram 224205 to Geneva, September 2, transmitted the draft text of the U.S. response, which stated, in part: “The United States seriously questions whether a single complaint which makes reference to only a few specific allegations, all of which are claimed to have occurred in a single city, which have been and are being investigated by Federal, state, and local officials, and which are the subject of amelioratory action, can meet the standard required by resolution 1503.” (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D780360–0288)
In telegram 13482 from Geneva, September 8, the Mission provided the Department with the version of the response delivered to the Director of the United Nations Human Rights Division, Theodore Van Boven, on September 5. The response summarized efforts taken to investigate police brutality and drew attention to the anticipated September 6 release by the Tennessee Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights of a report entitled “Civil Crisis—Civic Challenge: Police-Community Relations in Memphis,” which purportedly would refute the allegation that there had been no response to the complaints. (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D780366–0460)
Prior to the Subcommission’s consideration of the U.S. response, National Security Council Staff member Jessica Tuchman Mathews communicated with U.S. Representative to the UN Human Rights Commission Edward Mezvinsky and U.S. Representative to the Mission at Geneva William vanden Heuvel concerning Ambassador Beverly Carter’s actions as a member of the Working Group. In the NSC Global Issues Cluster’s September 5 evening report, Tuchman Mathews commented that she had spoken to Mezvinsky regarding the citation issued against the United States, which she believed was “potentially devastating to the [administration’s human rights] policy,” noting, “we can’t pursue an aggressive human rights policy until our own house is basically in order, which means ratifying the major international covenants and treaties, and staffing our UN missions so that we avoid shooting ourselves in the foot at regular intervals.” (Carter Library, National Security Affairs, Staff Material, Global Issues—Oplinger/Bloomfield Subject File, Box 36, Evening Reports: 9–12/78)
Tuchman Mathews again expressed concerns to Vanden Heuvel on September 6, as she informed the President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs, Zbigniew Brzezinski: “Vanden Heuvel is in a very delicate situation in that the Sub-Commission is supposed to be composed [Page 528] of uninstructed experts and therefore we can’t lobby openly. However, he will talk to some key delegates with whom he has personal relationships, and he is more optimistic about the outcome than I had expected. I assured him of the White House’s strong support for the most vigorous possible efforts to avert a negative vote against the U.S. (despite State’s lukewarm approach to this mess) and promised to talk with him after the vote (Monday) about changes in staffing and procedures that will avoid this kind of thing in the future.” (NSC Global Issues Cluster September 6 evening report; ibid.)
The Subcommission considered the complaint against the United States during a September 11 closed meeting. In telegram 13662 from Geneva, September 12, the Mission reported that the Subcommission voted not to elevate the communication regarding the United States to the UN Human Rights Commission by a vote of 5–5 with 11 abstentions. (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D780370–0575) Tuchman Mathews and Denend summarized the outcome in the NSC Global Issues Cluster’s September 15 evening report: “The vote of the UN Human Rights Sub-Commission on whether the US should be cited as a gross and consistent violator of human rights was as close as it could be 5–5 with 11 abstentions. The tie means that we will not be cited. However the incident reveals many things that need changing, particularly our staffing of these Commissions (it is a contradiction in terms to have an FSO, not to mention an Ambassador, functioning as an ‘uninstructed expert’). Also our procedures for responding to complaints against ourselves and for helping others to file complaints (e.g., against the USSR) are woefully inadequate. The incident also revealed a profound difference of opinion within the government (and the NSC staff) as to what our posture should be with respect to our own human rights record. At our request, Ambassador Vanden Heuvel, who did an excellent job in dealing with this problem will be sending in his suggestions for steps that should be taken.” (Carter Library, National Security Affairs, Staff Material, Global Issues—Oplinger/Bloomfield Subject File, Box 36, Evening Reports: 9–12/78)