Durban II

UN votes to implement Durban plan

Nathalie Rothschild — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 12:51:53 +0000

The UN General Assembly this week approved a draft resolution to implement the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action.

The resolution, approved at a UN Social, Humanitarian Cultural Affairs Committee meeting after some revisions, was passed on Tuesday with 126 votes in favour and five against. There were 43 abstentions.

Originally drafted at the 2001 World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, the Durban Declaration has been criticised as a thinly masked attempt to single out Israel for criticism and sanctions. Israel is the only country out of 192 UN member states that is charged with racism in the document.

Speaking on behalf of the EU at Tuesday's General Assembly vote, Poland's delegate said mentions of specific groups or clear references to particular religions or beliefs should not be part of a text that aims to combat racism.

The EU member states abstained; the five who voted against were Australia, Canada, Israel, the Marshall Islands and the United States.

This week's General Assembly vote follows a meeting held on 22 September in New York to mark the 10-year anniversary of the first Durban conference. Dubbed "Durban III", the meeting was boycotted by several countries, including the Western veto-holding members of the Security Council - the United States, the UK and France.

The recently published transcripts from Durban III show a continued focus on Israel. For instance, the Tunisian Foreign Minister said the Durban anniversary provided an opportunity "to highlight… first and foremost, the Palestinian people". The Syrian Ambassador to the UN objected to "the racist concept of a Jewish state of Israel".

The 2001 Durban conference has been criticised for its harsh language against Israel and for attempting to revive the 1975 UN resolution equating Zionism with racism.

At the Durban II conference in 2009 in Geneva, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad famously gave a speech in which he attacked Israel and denied the Holocaust.

Service as usual at New York Durban conference

Tue, 11 Oct 2011 16:33:48 +0100

Durban III, the UN’s third “anti-racism” conference in New York last month proved to be the exercise in Israel-bashing that everyone had expected.
It served as the podium for the Lebanese and Syrian foreign ministers to charge that the very concept of “a Jewish state” is “an act of racism”.
Delegates from Iran, Tunisia, Egypt, Cuba and Ecuador weighed in with the calumnies, accusing Israel of “racist apartheid crimes” and attacking “its manipulation of the international community in forcing the Zionist-controlled United States to boycott this Durban conference”.
UN Human Rights High Commissioner, Navi Pillay, when opening the gathering, listed all “victim groups of the anti-discrimination agenda” — except for one.
The litany of racism targets, from African migrants to indigenous peoples, from Roma to trafficked slaves, was read out by Sudan, as well as the chair of CERD (the UN Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination) and the Expert on the Implementation of the Durban Programme and Plan of Action (DDPA).
Any reference to “antisemitism” was strikingly absent as, apparently for the UN, Jews are no longer among the vulnerable. Meanwhile, Sudan spoke for the African group without mentioning Rwandan Tutsis or the ethnic cleansing of Darfuris or Southern Sudanese by its own government.
The brotherhood of human rights violators provided a backdrop for Iranian President Ahmadinejad’s speech in the adjoining hall.
Minus the few Western democracies that absented themselves, the concluding Resolution A/66/L2 was endorsed.In reaffirming the 2001 DDPA, the UN has now revalidated its original clauses that cast Zionism as “racism” and Israel as an “apartheid state”.
Only ten non-governmental organisations were permitted to speak at two round-tables. Other groups grumbled at the arguably covert manner in which they had been selected — according to Geneva UN sources, by General Assembly President, the Ambassador of Qatar, Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser.
The two Jewish organisations were accredited to the main hall for the conference opening and close, but were relegated to an overflow room to watch the round-tables on a TV screen.
Thirteen major nations — the US, Australia, Canada, Britain, France, New Zealand, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Austria, the Czech Republic, Poland and Bulgaria — boycotted the event. Sadly, however, Spain, Belgium, Sweden and Greece participated, providing the stance taken by Iran, Syria, North Korea, Burma, China, Zimbabwe and other dictatorships with a dose of legitimacy. For these countries, Israel remains a scapegoat to cover up continuing domestic oppression.

Shimon Samuels and Sergio Widder are respectively Director for International Relations and Director for Latin America of the Simon Wiesenthal Centre

Durban III: the hatefest is back

Shimon Samuels — Thu, 22 Sep 2011 12:33:28 +0100

As the only Jew elected to the International Steering Committee (ISC) for Durban, I was gagged in the preparatory meetings in Warsaw and Santiago; offered a deal in Geneva by the PLO legal counsel ("we will give you the Holocaust if you give us Palestine"); denied access to the last preparatory gathering in Tehran and expelled unceremoniously in Durban itself as "the world Jew".

Three months later, on December 6, 2001, I attended, uninvited, the final ISC meeting in Geneva. An eight-point plan was circulated for the next decade, to be reviewed at this week's Durban gathering in New York.

Based on the campaign against South African apartheid, the plan listed measures to isolate Israel, through UN agencies, the internet, universities, trade unions and sport.

The "Durban manifesto", by 2003, was being promulgated by the anti-globalisation World Social Forum (WSF), in Porto Alegre, Brazil, and its European Social Forum satellites across the EU.

I stood in the Porto Alegre stadium and saw the banners that hung from the stands: "No Jews, Nazis, Yankees - No More Chosen Peoples". Over 76, 000 young people from over 100 countries were screaming: "Viva la Intifada Global".

It was here that the "Boycott, Divestment, Sanction" mantra could be heard for the first time. We also learned of the forthcoming campaigns and calendars formulated to harm Israel and, by association, world Jewry.

It was at the WSF that we received an early warning of the flotilla, whose lead ship was then to be called "Exodus II".

The "Durban Manifesto" has inculcated broad swathes of the international public to believe that the true Holocaust was the Palestinian "Nakba", or "catastrophe", when thousands of Palestinians fled during the 1948 war; that antisemitism is a prejudice against the other "Semite" - the Arab. After Durban, Jewish narrative has been the subject of identity theft to serve the Palestinian cause.

The real victims of Nazism saw their agenda hijacked at Durban. Roma Gypsies, Indian Dalits and Sudanese slaves were abandoned, and many joined us in their frustration.

In 2002, we attended the Johannesburg Summit on Sustainable Development. Infested by "Durbanisation", this UN environmental meeting hosted charges of Israeli "ecocide" and vicious assaults on the Jewish National Fund as an "agent of colonialism".This month we arrived at the decade update gathering in Chile, after writing to all participating organisations. We had requested that they stay focused on the agenda: biodiversity, desertification, ecology - and not let themselves be politicised. Many groups validated our campaign and the Santiago meeting was uneventful.

From Durban 2001 to the 2009 Review Conference featuring Ahmadinejad in Geneva, and now in New York, the hatefest goes on. Our sages wrote of " the three sins of Damascus" and "the fourth which would see no reprieve". May the conference that took place this week - the third sin of Durban - be the last.

Pivots and change

Thu, 22 Sep 2011 11:30:15 +0100

As we approach Rosh Hashanah, our thoughts naturally turn to the year gone by and the possibilities that lie ahead. The chagim are a pivotal annual moment.

Not that the Middle East needs any more pivotal moments. Whatever the eventual outcome of the Palestinian bid for statehood at the UN, what the region needs more than anything is stability and liberty.

Stability is one thing. But what matters is how it arises. And that is why liberty is so critical: liberty for Israelis to go about their lives in peace; liberty for those who have lived under despotic regimes; and, yes, liberty for the Palestinians to live in their own state. The Palestinians have never, to use Abba Eban's famous words, missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity. This time, they appear to have created an opportunity to make things even worse - for themselves, for Israel and for the region as a whole. The British government deserves credit for attempting to take the sting out of the issue with its diplomacy.

We have had cause to criticise the coalition this past year. But the decision to pull out of Durban III and the legislation over universal jurisdiction - which, for all its huffing and puffing, Labour flunked in office - reflect well on David Cameron. As for Labour: it now appears intent only on making itself irrelevant.

It would be an undeserved insult to describe its unconditional backing for a Palestinian state as student politics - undeserved, that is, to students, given that the UJS has shown great creativity in its attempt to change the entire narrative on campus. The government has, sensibly, waited to see what, if anything, is actually on the table before committing its vote. Labour has simply ignored legitimate Israeli concerns - over the remit of the International Criminal Court and security, for instance – and said yes, without waiting for the specifics of any Palestinian proposal. That is both irreponsible and dangerous.

Britain pulls out of Durban III meeting

Jennifer Lipman — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 13:25:18 +0100

Britain will not take part in the anniversary event later this month marking ten years since the UN's controversial Durban conference.

The Prime Minister, following in the footsteps of Australia, Canada and the United States, said he felt it would be wrong to commemorate an event associated with "open displays of unpleasant and deplorable antisemitism".

The 2001 World Conference on Racism, held in Durban, South Africa, was criticised after it descended into a forum to attack Israel.

The then Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat used one session publicly to denounce Israel and there was an attempt to reintroduce the "Zionism equals racism" UN resolution of 1975.

A review conference in Geneva two years ago attracted a similar outcry after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was invited to make the opening-day address and accused Israel of being racist.

The UK delegation walked out of Ahmadinejad's speech but faced criticism for not taking a strong enough stand and Mr Cameron was determined not to repeat that this year.

He said that after "careful consideration", he had decided Britain should not attend.

"No one should be in any doubt: this government is 100 per cent committed to tackling racism both at home and abroad," he said. "But those aims cannot be met by accepting this invitation."

He added that the displays of antisemitism at the first conference should be condemned, not commemorated.

Last year the UK voted against the resolution establishing the conference "in light of" the events of 2009, but until now the government had refused to say if UK representatives would take part, despite calls from the Jewish community and human rights group

Vivian Wineman, president of the Board of Deputies, said he was delighted with Mr Cameron's decision. "It is farcical that a conference which may again be addressed by President Ahmadinajad of Iran can have any pretentions to be taken seriously on the matter of human rights or any other topic," he said.

David Cameron, Durban and dancing at the UN

Jennifer Lipman — Wed, 14 Sep 2011 20:06:19 +0100

Political life often seems to be something of a dance, a complicated balancing act in order to offend no-one, appease everyone and commit yourself to nothing.

So kudos to David Cameron for (finally) deciding that Britain won't take part in the tenth birthday party of the Durban conference, an event supposedly about challenging racism that turned into the political equivalent of putting a kid in the middle of the playground and standing around pointing and mocking.

Cameron said he doesn't want to commemorate a conference (actually, two, the 2009 review affair was also something of a hate-fest) associated with "open displays of unpleasant and deplorable antisemitism".

Good on him. And yet, as pleased as I am, I don't want to be too optimistic.

As I said, politics is a dance.

Cameron wants the support of the Anglo-Jewish community, but he also wants the backing of all the other "political forces" as well.

At the General Assembly session, there's another controversial item on the agenda; the Palestinian plans to bid for statehood.

The unilateral move, already avowedly opposed by the White House, has been backed by many, many other groups including a number of EU bigwigs. Britain's approach to the bid has yet to be officially revealed.

The savvy politician wants to please everyone. And if he can't, what's the next best thing? Ameliorate the critics in one area because you know you're going to go against their wishes in another?

Rant about Israel in Turkey then make nice with the Jews at a formal dinner? Cameron would never…oh, wait.

Maybe Cameron won't back the Palestinians (despite the pleas of Israel and Jewish groups worldwide) in what seems to be a largely symbolic move without any hope of helping the peace process on the ground. Maybe this is not a cynical move.

But, he wouldn't have got to this point in British politics without being a consummate dancer.

David Cameron pulls Britain out of Durban anniversary conference

Jennifer Lipman — Wed, 14 Sep 2011 16:48:35 +0100

David Cameron has intervened to pull Britain out of the follow-up to the controversial Durban conference.

The Prime Minister is understood to have personally made the decision that the UK should not take part in the event at the United Nations headquarters later this month.

The JC understands that the Prime Minister did not want the UK to be seen to celebrate the anniversary of an event associated with antisemitism.

Australia and the United States have already announced that they would boycott the event, with the US condemning it for commemorating "ugly displays of intolerance and antisemitism".

The UK voted against the resolution establishing the conference "in light of" the events of 2009 but in June a Foreign Office spokesman said a decision about attendance had not yet been made.

However today Mr Cameron said that after "careful consideration" he had decided Britain should not attend.

"No one should be in any doubt: this Government is 100 per cent committed to tackling racism both at home and abroad. I have made clear that racism has no place in any civilised society, is a menace to social progress and deeply offensive - so it must be confronted everywhere.

"But those aims cannot be met by accepting this invitation," he said. "Ten years ago, the World Conference on Racism saw open displays of unpleasant and deplorable antisemitism.

"It would be wrong to commemorate those displays. Indeed, they should be condemned. And that's why the UK will play no part in this conference."

It is ten years since the UN World Conference Against Racism, held in Durban, South Africa. At the time the event was criticised for descending into a forum to attack Israel. In one session the then Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat denounced Israel, while there was an attempt to reintroduce the "Zionism equals racism" UN resolution of 1975.

Two years ago a review conference was held in Geneva, attracting similar outcry after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was invited to make the opening-day address and accused Israel of being racist. The UK delegation walked out of his speech, although senior UN figures, including the UN Human Rights Commissioner, refused.

Last month former Foreign Office Minister Denis MacShane, who attended the original conference, wrote to Foreign Secretary William Hague urging the British government to pull out of this month's conference.

Vivian Wineman, president of the Board of Deputies, said he was delighted with the decision. "It is farcical that a conference which may again be again be addressed by President Ahmadinajad of Iran can have any pretentions to be taken seriously on the matter of human rights or any other topic," he said.

"I am proud that as a community we have consistently urged Britain's withdrawal and wish to thank the British Government for making this decision."

His comments were echoed by Ros Preston, chair of the Jewish Human Rights Coalition, who expressed hope the UK government would "continue to use their good influence in any future process".

The Israeli embassy said: "This conference long ago evolved into the inverse of its original purpose. We welcome the British government's decision today to place itself on the right side of this conference, on the outside of the door."

On Thursday the change in the universal jurisdiction legislation is due to get Royal Assent and become law.

'Anti-Durban' event planned for New York

Ellen Tumposky — Thu, 01 Sep 2011 12:06:49 +0100

Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel will be among the speakers at a counter-event challenging the "Durban III" United Nations conference on racism in New York later this month.

The UN conference is due to take place on September 22, the 10th anniversary of the original, and notorious, event in Durban, South Africa.

The counter-conference, which is being held on the same day, is organised by the Hudson Institute, a Manhattan-based think tank, and the Touro College Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust.

Other speakers will include former New York City Mayor Ed Koch, former Israeli UN envoy Dore Gold, actor Jon Voight and Ronald Lauder, president of the World Jewish Congress.

"It's an affront to anyone who cares about human rights to commemorate the antisemitic hate-fest that was Durban I," said Anne Bayefsky, director of the Touro College Institute and a key organiser of the counter-conference.

"Yet shortly after New Yorkers and Americans go through the trauma of the tenth anniversary of 9/11, the UN is going to celebrate the hatred and antisemitism of the first Durban conference," she said.

At that conference, which ended days before the attacks of September 11, 2001, the US and Israel walked out over a draft document which equated Zionism with racism.

"What's so appalling is the failure to recognise the relationship between hate and violence," said Ms Bayefsky. "Durban encouraged hate, antisemitism and discrimination against Israel, and terrorism follows."

Other speakers at the counter-conference will include former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz. Ms Bayefsky said the response has been "overwhelming". It will be webcast at durbanwatch.com.

The US, Israel, Australia and Canada, among other nations, are boycotting Durban III. Ms Bayefsky said it was "appalling that Britain, who should well understand the danger of allowing antisemitism in any form to go unchecked and who is a founding member of the UN", is participating. She also denounced Germany's failure to boycott the meeting.

Australia to boycott Durban review conference

Dan Goldberg — Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:24:59 +0100

Australia has joined America, Canada, Israel and several European nations in withdrawing from the controversial UN conference on racism next month.

A spokesperson for Prime Minister Julia Gillard confirmed Tuesday that she was not convinced that "unbalanced criticism of Israel and the airing of antisemitic views" would be avoided, her spokesperson said.

Australia thus would not send a representative to the meeting in New York, dubbed "Durban III" after the original anti-racism conference in the South African city 10 years ago that was marred by antisemitism, prompting Australia, among other western countries, to walk out.

The Labor government subsequently boycotted the second conference in 2009, during which Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad unleashed a vitriolic attack on Israel and the Jews.

The PM's spokesperson said Australia remained involved in early consultations "to oppose attempts to endorse extreme language or explicit references to the text of the Durban Declaration." But Australia would not be able to "support a meeting that chooses to reaffirm the original Durban Declaration, as appears likely," the spokesperson said.

Executive Council of Australian Jewry president Dr Danny Lamm welcomed the decision, which he had been urging since last November.

"We have said that Australia should take no part in a process that remains irredeemably corrupted by racism and by attacks on Israel's legitimacy as the State of the Jewish people," he said.

"When a respected middle power democracy like Australia decides to stay away from as high profile an event as Durban III it sends a powerful message to the international community that the UN Human Rights Council and related organs of the UN General Assembly need to clean up their act."

The Czech Republic, Italy and the Netherlands have also declined to attend.

MacShane to Hague: 'Pull out of Durban'

Martin Bright — Thu, 11 Aug 2011 12:18:48 +0100

A former UK foreign minister has written an open letter to Foreign Secretary William Hague calling on the British government to pull out of next month's conference to mark the tenth anniversary of the Durban declaration on anti-racism. This document singled out Israel as the only perpetrator of human rights abuses.

Denis MacShane, who attended the original conference in South Africa, said the conference and its follow-up in Geneva in 2009 "provided a platform for the most egregious expression of Jew-hatred seen on the international stage so far this century".

The World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance will take place just as the UN General Assembly considers a possible unilateral declaration of independence (UDI) by the Palestinians.

Dr MacShane, who was a Foreign Office minister from 2001 to 2005 under Jack Straw, said: "With hindsight I wish that Straw and his ministerial team, including myself, had had the guts to pull the UK out of the Durban 1 conference, and send a clear signal."

Dr MacShane also attended the Geneva conference two years ago when Iran's President Ahmadinejad stated that the Holocaust was "an ambiguous and dubious question".

Several countries, including Israel, America, Canada, Italy, the Netherlands and the Czech Republic have already pulled out of Durban III. The UK has so far decided to remain within the drafting process of a new anniversary declaration. The Jewish Human Rights Coalition has called on Britain to pull out.

There is concern in pro-Israel circles that a new statement from the anti-racism conference targeting Israel would provide ammunition to those pressing for Palestinian UDI.

At the same time, UK Jewish leaders are keen not to let Durban III become a distraction from the September vote in the General Assembly. "We don't want the government to do the right thing on Durban III and not on UDI," said one senior source.