Moving from Africa to human rights in middle east
UN is in its project on main
July 26
Hello
due to resources and not having enough time I will not be sharing more topics in this part , till te end of this year
in new year, I hope I will improve time management and resources
UN rights chief Michelle Bachelet announced Monday that she will not seek a second term, ending months of speculation about her intentions amid growing criticism of her lax stance on rights abuses in China.
Speaking to the media after addressing the summer session of the U.N.-backed Human Rights Council in Geneva, Bachelet confirmed that she would be stepping down when her current term ended on 31 August, as she wanted to go back to her family and her country.
Her office repeatedly said she and staffers were working to create the right conditions for the trip, which ultimately took place last month.
But critics said she hasn’t spoken out enough, and during the visit didn’t press local authorities enough.
Bachelet insisted that her trip was not an “investigation” and emphasised that she had opened a channel of communication with top Chinese authorities.
Answering journalists’ questions Monday, the 70-year-old said her decision has nothing to do with the trip to China or the criticism she received.
“Can you imagine that having been president twice, I have received a lot of criticism in my life. So that’s not what makes you do certain decisions,” she said.
“This is a decision and really, truly because my family needs me there and because my country needs me there.”
A veteran politician who had rubbed elbows with leaders worldwide while Chile’s president, and the daughter of a man who was tortured under a rightist regime in the country, Bachelet was widely seen as a politically savvy choice who would bring in a less vocal and more cooperative approach to the office than her outspoken predecessor Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein – a Jordanian prince.
Michel Bachlet will not seek re election as un human rights counsel
2 important files was working on by UNHRC
Ukrain war crimes
China human rights file
Strong people needed in this important moment FOR UN and INternational Order
All Best Wishes for Ms Micheal IN her next step and for next United Nations Human rights chief
awesome difinition , motly about human and palnets , but general difinition is awesome
like to share and see how reading could give you some thoughts
1: a branch of morphology that deals with the structure of organisms
2: a treatise on anatomical science or art
3: the art of separating the parts of an organism in order to ascertain their position, relations, structure, and function : DISSECTION
4obsolete : a body dissected or to be dissected
5: structural makeup especially of an organism or any of its partsthe anatomy of birdshuman anatomy
6: a separating or dividing into parts for detailed examination
cambridge
a detailed examination of a subject:
looks great
Work on War crimes take A lot of work and assigning spcila teams and counting the numbesrs
It takes time (More than a week to call it war crime)
this topic is going to need some time so I dont think I am going to finish it today
I may finish it in next week
I hope you like it
reltaed topic
link 1
link 2
Update Sunday April 9
I hope you are interested in this project
skitching is promoising
it is nice to discover How much you can do in it and How you can discover how project will be and what is possible rule you may fill
additional to know international justice court
additional to know war crime court
-Situation in Tigray
-situation in Myanmar
all efforts that has been done By UN in these situations
there are other situations
it is ok for introduction to start with these 2 situations
next step
Looks very nice and awesome people
congratulation on your great and honest efforts
here is their website to know more about them
HI
Happy Sunday
this point from this prospective (what does preventing people or reduce building trust )
deception or cheat
this happen to a lot of people , How does it affect ?
we learn from our experiments and situations that we been into.
so its affect may stay or may be released with hope , new day
Point one
you build trust in years and you lose it in a few.
less level that is match less time and effort and less ( say feel when you loose trust)
is confidence with agreements
that what i am looking for
Can Michael Gove’s alleged betrayal of Boris Johnson teach us about ourselves?
Plastered across the British Press are terms such as ‘betrayal’ and ‘back-stabbing’, as Britain reels in reaction to the news that Boris Johnson, widely tipped to the be the UK’s next Prime Minister, has had his ambitions thwarted by his close colleague, Michael Gove.
The fellow Parliamentarian’s decision to stand for election has mysteriously coincided with Boris Johnson’s sudden and unexpected last minute withdrawal from the leadership contest of The Conservative Party.
The result is that the candidate most widely tipped to win, has dramatically, and at the very last moment, pulled out of a fight to become the country’s next Prime Minister, despite apparently harbouring this determination for many years.
The political machinations behind the scenes lead the political pundits to speculate as to whether Michael Gove had plotted all along to become Prime Minister, by first getting rid of David Cameron.
After all, the Prime Minister’s resignation was inevitable had he lost the referendum vote. It may have been Gove who actively recruited Boris Johnson into becoming the lead campaigner of the ‘Leave’ campaign, when the charismatic and popular politician was allegedly wavering over the issue.
It was partly, yet significantly, down to Boris Johnson, most political pundits feel, that the campaign was victorious, then triggering the Prime Minister’s resignation.
Michael Gove, the allegation is, used Boris Johnson to get David Cameron out, and then scuppered Boris Johnson’s chances of standing, so creating an opportunity for Michael Gove to become the UK’s next Prime Minister.
The betrayal, if that is what it was, comes at the end of a closely plotted ‘game of chess’ which began many moves ago, and which has left Boris Johnson looking at best naïve, at worst foolish.
Psychologists might argue that in fact it is this last impact which could in the long run destroy Boris Johnson’s career. If this is true, then Michael Gove, widely perceived as the less charismatic and popular politician, very much the underdog in any competition with Boris Johnson, may have pulled off a remarkable coup, in grasping power through political machinations, despite being the less viable candidate.
Julie Fitness, head of the Psychology Department of Macquarie University, Australia, in a book chapter entitled ‘Betrayal, Rejection, Revenge, and Forgiveness: An Interpersonal Script Approach’, cites research that suggests nearly 19% of men reported having been betrayed by a colleague at work.
Is it possible that betrayal may be a key tool in the Machiavellian art of climbing the greasy pole in any competitive career? If so, then any ambitious person may have a lot to learn from the alleged strategizing of Michael Gove?
Or is betrayal a high risk gamble which inevitably produces a backlash, coming back to haunt and damage the ‘back-stabber’?
In a study of her own, into anger in the workplace, Fitness found betrayal-related ‘rule violations’ (e.g., lying and exploitation) were amongst the most frequently reported types of anger-inducing offence amongst co-workers.
If so, then betrayal, at least when it’s detected, is so upsetting that maybe it’s not worth it?
Fitness points out that treachery and betrayal have been, throughout all human history, considered amongst the very worst relationship offences people could commit. Dante, for example, Fitness reminds us, relegated traitors to the lowest and coldest regions of Hell, to be forever frozen up to their necks in a lake of ice with blizzards storming all about them. Worldwide, the crime of treason continues to merit the most severe penalties, in some places including capital punishment.
From an evolutionary perspective, our survival in ancestral environments within ancient tribes, meant that having evolved as social beings, we critically depended on the degree to which valued others accept and respect us.
Betrayal could have such devastating consequences, it was vital that we developed a mechanism to detect potential ‘cheaters’ and learned only to invest our resources with colleague who were not going to let us down.
This also applies to romantic commitment where the costs of infidelity were so large that it made sense we should be invested in finding intimate partners who were not going to betray us. It is no accident therefore, according to this evolutionary theory, that when it comes to betrayal, women appear much more upset by emotional unfaithfulness in a male partner with another woman, while men are more disturbed by sexual infidelity in a female partner.
Even today psychologists find women are more upset by an emotional betrayal in a male partner while men are most angered by a sexual infidelity in a female partner.
This pattern follows from the theory that back in our evolutionary past women depended most on male emotional commitment as this built an alliance which provided resources to help raise children, whereas men could never be absolutely certain the child a woman produced was their own, so it would be a fatal evolutionary error to commit to a woman who passed on another man’s genes into future generations.
Evolutionary Psychologists therefore go as far as arguing we may have some kind of psychological modules built into our brains to detect betrayal. We are likely to be particularly sensitive to it as it’s so very dangerous to us in a competitive world (as Boris Johnson has just discovered).
But in the ‘arms race’ that is betrayal those individuals who could exploit others through treachery and therefore gain an advantage might also have benefitted from this strategy, so passing on ‘duplicity’ genes into future generations.
You don’t have to competing to be the next Prime Minister for betrayal to become a high stakes game.
Fitness appears to argue in her chapter that key to understanding the psychological reaction to a betrayal and whether, for example, revenge and hatred will be enacted, lies in the realm of how humiliating the experience has been.
For example Fitness concludes from her own research that public humiliation by superiors at work is one of the most destructive long-term outcomes of these kinds of betrayal incidents.
Fitness argues the humiliating discovery that one has been the “last to know” about a partner’s infidelity, may trigger as much pain as the act of betrayal itself.
A key implication is that it’s the power balance between two parties which has been profoundly disrupted. In particular, when a betrayal has been accompanied by deceit or humiliation, Fitness points out, the betrayer effectively assumes a “one-up” position to the betrayed, who has been duped or demeaned.
Evolutionary psychologists contend this is so catastrophic for our social standing, that people will therefore go to extreme lengths to avoid looking weak or foolish.
Is this the key psychological problem that Boris Johnson now faces?
The next move in this chess game of betrayal, according to Fitness, is therefore often pursuit of revenge, to “even the score” between the two parties
