U.S. May Boycott U.N. Racism Conference Over Document

[Freddie Stubbs]

By Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, February 28, 2009; Page A06

NEW YORK, Feb. 27 -- The Obama administration has said it will boycott a major U.N. conference on racism scheduled for April unless significant changes are made to the draft outcome document, which U.S. officials say unfairly singles out Israel for censure and could restrict freedom of speech.

A State Department official said that the current text is "unsalvageable" and that the United States would reconsider its position only if the negotiators stripped out provisions criticizing Israel's occupation of Palestinian lands and recommendations for restrictions on the defamation of religions, an initiative by Islamic states that Washington fears could undercut free speech. The United States also opposes any language requiring reparations for slavery.

A U.S. delegation went to Geneva last week to participate in preliminary negotiations for the conference, which is being held to review progress on a declaration from the 2001 World Summit Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. The United States and Israel walked out of that meeting, held in Durban, South Africa, citing anti-Israel bias.

"Unfortunately, the document being negotiated has gone from bad to worse," a State Department official said. "As a result, the United States will not participate in the forthcoming negotiations on this text, nor will we be able to participate in a conference that is based on this text."

more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/27/AR2009022702826.html

[Hutzpa]

1. What is wrong with some of these nations?????

Why should Isreal be excluded from racism? so they can continue their killings
of Palestinian unchallenged.

Imagine the audacity.

[Freddie Stubbs]

4. The problem is that Israel is being singled out as a way to attack it

[garryowenII]

11. I hope you are being sarcastic. n/t

[T Wolf]

2. Israel still runs American foreign policy, to the detriment of all. Cut off all aid until it

starts acting like a civilized nation.

[Freddie Stubbs]

5. No, President Obama and Secretary Clinton run American foreign policy

Just because they do not agree with you on this issue does not mean that they are being controlled by a foreign country.

[Dr. Strange]

13. Canadian foreign policy too.

Israel and Canada have said they will boycott the April review conference, asserting that initial preparatory meetings have confirmed their fears of anti-Israel bias in the process.

Damn, them Jews is a powerful bunch.

[anonymous171]

14. No they don't. They are just our only current ally in that region.

So we support them unconditionally (which I think is a mistake as well.) Think like Kissinger and it starts to make sense.

[Raineyb]

3. WTF?

This is unacceptable. Israel should be called out. I'm tired of our politicians sucking up to the Israeli lobby. Call them out, cut them off and don't return their calls until they behave like civilized people. If it were any other country we'd be calling them out for ethnic cleansing already!

Regards

[Freddie Stubbs]

6. It is acceptable to the President

[Raineyb]

15. It is not acceptable to me as a voter.

And frankly it ought not be acceptable to the President either.

Regards

[Freddie Stubbs]

16. The President was elected on a platform of supporting Isreal and you can bet that

he will run on a similar one for reelection. He'll get far more votes as a supporter of Israel than he would if he did not support them.

[Raineyb]

17. So much for change.

I prefer doing the right thing rather than sucking up to the Israeli lobby. Because our no question asked, never point out Israel's wrongdoing approach to doing things is not doing us any favors and it's just plain wrong.

I guess we'll continue to sit silently while Israel continues to flout international law with our weapons killing civilians.

:thumbsdown:

[Freddie Stubbs]

19. Supporting Israel is the right thing to do due to our shared interests and shared values

Israel is our only ally in the region and its only established democracy.

[Raineyb]

21. Our shared values ought not be the wholesale slaughter of people

whether they be in the Gaza Strip, Iraq, or anywhere else.

And Israel is not an actual democracy. Having a government that is deliberately set up for a single religion, ethnicity, or race is the antithesis of democracy. You can't have all people equal when one group is considered more valuable or desirable for citizens than others. Did South Africa teach you nothing?

[Freddie Stubbs]

22. Isreali Arabs are citizens--there are 12 Arabs in the Knesset

[Raineyb]

23. Does that include the man who was locked up for no apparent reason

something to do with a speech he made? Or did they kick him out?

Sounds like second class citizenry to me.

[pampango]

7. There's racism all over the world. Singling out ANY one country before a conference starts

is counterproductive if your goal is to discuss and do something about racism and xenophobia, not just to score political points. During the conference, discuss racism, xenophobia and genocides everywhere (Israel, the US, Zimbabwe, Sudan, Russia, etc.) and then try to agree on a final document that can make progress towards solving these problems. A PR exercise to demonize one and avoid dealing with the larger problem accomplishes further polarization but little progress.

Maybe American Christian fundamentalists, Islamic states, the pope and Jewish leaders can get together behind this movement to limit criticism of religions. I'm sure they all feel unfairly criticized at times, though I'm not sure how many actually want to limit speech. For sure the US should not agree to limit criticism of anything, but if the conference openly and fairly discussed the idea that would be good for everyone.

The idea of the UN is to provide a forum for nations to discuss their shared concerns as well as their differences. It seems counterintuitive for a UN conference to draft a final document before the conference even happens. It implies that the conference discussions are just for show not a real exchange of shared concerns and differences. Whether the predetermined final document is controlled by Western nations, Islamic nations, rich nations, or poor nations it becomes a PR document, not a real contribution to pointing out problems and recommending solutions.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

8. I think the US has a strong case.

I'm all in favour of criticising Israel (as anyone I've argued with in the I/P forum will know), but it's not one of the worst-offending states in the world in terms of racism, and singling it out in this way smacks of hypocricy.

And restricting the criticism or defamation of religions is a very bad idea indeed.

[tritsofme]

9. dupe

[tritsofme]

10. The President shouldn't give legitimacy to these anti-Semitic thugs.

Good for him.

[Occam Bandage]

12. I am generally critical of Israel, but I agree with this decision.

Conferences on racism should not be hijacked for geopolitical fights.

[grantcart]

20. I find charges of racism against Israel to be unfathomable.

Again this has nothing to do with criticizing Israel on other matters. When a group of Africans were discovered to be long lost descendents of an ancient Jewish sect they were put to a Rabinnical test and when it was established that they were in fact Jews, massive efforts were made (including bribing the Sudanese government) to move them to Israel, race was never a consideration.

http://countrystudies.us/sudan/40.htm

Another ethnic group involved in migration was that of the Falashas, who were Ethiopian Jews. In January 1985 it was revealed that the Sudanese government had cooperated with Ethiopia, Israel, and the United States in transporting several thousand Falashas through Sudan to Israel. Their departure occurred initially on a small scale in 1979 and 1982 and in larger numbers between 1983 and 1985. In Sudan, the Falashas had been placed in temporary refugee settlements and reception centers organized by the Sudanese government.

Ironically this opened the eyes of Muslim Sudanese who wanted to escape the fighting in Sudan.

http://www.israelnewsagency.com/sudandarfurisraelrefugeeshumanitarianjews48072307.html

The irony has now reached a high point where countries that will not accept refugees from Sudan are calling Israel racist while Israel does extend some protection to non Jewish refugees from Sudan.

"Israel only has walls against terrorism, with open doors for the poor, the hungry and homeless," said a member of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. "What do the children of the Sudan know about Israel that those who boycott us from England do not know? For those who think to boycott Israel, let them speak to the starving children of Sudan who we feed, blanket and provide security to."

[SpartanDem]

18. The part of about restricting

defamation of religions is disturbing it's just another lame attempt to restrict free speech in the name tolerance and it's not something we should condone