One last favour: Australia to help out the US over Cuba?

South African diplomat Sivu Maqungo, on behalf of the Group of 77, supported the Cuban motion “because this relentless and unilateral action has caused untold suffering to the people of Cuba”. The motion was a way to exert pressure on US actions that are “contrary to international law, international humanitarian law, the United Nations Charter and the norms and principles governing peaceful relations among States".

What did the Australian “human rights” amendment have to do with a motion over the US trade blockade of Cuba? Very little. Opposition to the US blockade has steadily grown at the UN, and it was clear the amendment would fail. However the US wanted to save face, and needed “allies” to pretend a little legitimacy.

The major “human rights” accusation the US aims at Cuba concerns political prisoners. Cuba does have several dozen political prisoners, but almost all have been convicted of taking money from US government programs which aim to overthrow the Cuban Government and constitution.

The US claims that these US-paid agents have special privileges as “independent journalists” or part of “civil society”.

The US also pretends that Cuba does not have elections, because the US funded groups are banned from contesting, and because the constitution embeds socialist principles. In fact, Cuban national elections are due next month.

After Hill’s motion failed, Cuban Foreign Minister Felipe Perez Roque said that Australia “does not have the moral authority to attempt to refer to the human rights situation in Cuba”. Perez Roque called Australia a “lackey” and “accomplice” in US wars of imperialism.

Indeed. Robert Hill personally, as Defence Minister, directed Australian bombing raids and missile strikes in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He was personally responsible for the slaughter of many thousands of innocent Iraqis. Hill also hid his knowledge of the torture operations at Abu Ghraib for over a year, and backed the closure of Al-Jazeera’s Baghdad television station. Hill’s colleague, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, argued for the invasion of Iraq on the basis that support for the US-led war could benefit “Australia’s commercial position in Iraq”. These are better credentials for war criminals than defenders of human rights.

Nevertheless, Hill feigned innocence at the UN, saying that “the price of speaking up and asking for nothing more than [what] is reasonable is to be abused by the Cuban minister, with false allegations and offensive language”.

Stay tuned for the next instalment of the Howard Government’s spirited defence of “human rights” at the United Nations. The next anti-blockade motion is scheduled for late October. With Howard’s defeat looming in the imminent Australian elections, Washington might call on one last favour.