When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You are talking anti-Semitism. --The Rev. Martin Luther King, 1968
The remarks above, which the Rev. King reportedly made at a Harvard University dinner, shortly before his assassination, are quoted in a U.S. State Department report released this past March in response to "rising anti-Semitism worldwide." I came across them while seeking background on a notoriously anti-Semitic United Nations conference held in 2001 in Durban, South Africa. Billed as an effort to fight racism, that Durban conclave focused instead on vilifying Israel--whipping up hatred to such an extreme that then- Secretary of State Colin Powell ordered the U.S. delegation to walk out.
I wonder what the Rev. King would make of the U.N.'s current drive to reprise that festival of prejudice, in the form of a "Durban Review Conference," scheduled for April 2009 in Geneva, Switzerland. Even more to the point, because Durban II looms as an early foreign-policy test of the next U.S. administration, what will President-elect Obama do about it?
As in 2001, the U.N. pretext is to end racism. Or, in U.N. lingo--take a deep breath -- the aim is "the total elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance."
Sounds great, right? Except the U.N.'s Orwellian twist, once again, is that this conference is configured not to end racism, but to stir up hatred. In a series of preparatory meetings over the past 16 months, the organizers have already taken aim at Israel as their prime target. Increasingly, the organizers are also priming the conference for a broader attack on other democratic nations, especially the U.S. Some are pushing for a U.N.-backed gag order that would enlist Islamic anti-blasphemy laws to stifle free speech worldwide.
Who are these organizers? The 20-member preparatory committee, operating out of Geneva, is chaired by a Libyan ambassador, Najat Al-Hajjaji. Back in 2003, she chaired the U.N.'s former Human Rights Commission, which discredited itself not only by picking Al-Hajjaji, envoy of Libya's despotic regime, to run the show, but also by slamming Israel 27 times from 2001 to 2006. As the State Department anti-Semitism report notes, this was more than twice the number of UNHRC criticisms leveled during that same period at North Korea, Burma and Sudan combined.
In 2006, as part of a package of U.N. "reforms," that farce of a Human Rights Commission was dissolved. It was replaced by the current sham of a Human Rights Council, which in its first 16 months spent most of its time issuing 15 criticisms of Israel, and then singled out Israel to become a permanent item on its agenda.
This same Human Rights Council is now providing the official umbrella and support staff for the Durban Review Conference. Among the vice-chairs of the preparatory committee are emissaries of such unfree countries as Iran, Russia, Pakistan and Cameroon (which, according to New York-based Freedom House, still tolerates slavery in its northern reaches). Cuba--where wholesale repression includes the additional frill of job discrimination against Afro-Cubans--fills two seats at this Durban II table, which features both a Cuban vice-chair and Cuba as Rapporteur.
Epitomizing the hypocrisy of this exercise is a statement submitted to the U.N. earlier this year by Iran, which also helped organize the original, 2001 Durban conference. Tehran proclaims that "The Islamic Republic of Iran, according to its formal and practical policies, is opposed to any policy based on racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and has fought against this phenomenon at national, regional and international levels." This comes from the Iranian regime, which along with supporting terrorists, threatening to wipe Israel off the map and violating five U.N. Security Council resolutions meant to stop its nuclear bomb program, pursues domestic policies of forcing women to wear the veil and executes homosexuals.
Or consider another one of the organizers: vice-chair Pakistan. The Pakistani government is right now denying any involvement in last week's terrorist assault on Mumbai--in which hundreds were murdered, but where the targets most deliberately hunted down were Americans, Britons and Jews. As the Durban II preparations take aim at those same groups, vice-chair Pakistan has been doubling on the preparatory committee as the mouthpiece for the Organization of the Islamic Conference. The OIC is the Saudi-headquartered 57-member-state outfit that forms the core of the dominant lobbying bloc in the U.N. General Assembly, which authorized this Durban repeat.
As for U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, he was quick to express horror over the hate that fueled the terrorist assault on Mumbai. But he has done nothing to defuse the ticking bomb of Durban II. Instead, Ban's office has been dutifully processing the multi-million dollar funding requests of the Durban organizers. The U.S., which contributes an out-sized 22% to Ban's budget, is planning to withhold a small portion of that money in hope of pressuring the U.N. into better behavior. Good luck. The U.N. dodge has been to re-frame the total conference tab, now estimated at about $5.1 million, as coming mainly from resources already available, plus donations. China has committed $20,000, Russia $600,000 and a number of as-yet-unnamed member states are expected to pony up.
All of which begs the larger point, that U.S. taxpayers are the chief sugar daddies for the entire U.N. system, which--with its logo, premises and diplomatic perquisites--will give this conference a world stage and stamp of authority it would not otherwise enjoy.
Durban II is not solely a mob move against Israel. It is a dishonor to real heroes of the war on prejudice, such as Martin Luther King. It is an assault on the genuine tolerance of free societies. It is an attempt to commandeer the U.N.--yet again--as a vehicle for the kind of hate that leads to such horrors as the slaughter in Mumbai, or for that matter, Sept. 11. Among the U.N.'s 192 member states, only two have had the backbone to announce that they will boycott the Durban Review: Canada, and for obvious reasons, Israel. In the U.S., President Bush has deferred any final decision to the next administration. President-elect Obama, what will you do about Durban II?
