CHRONICLE supplement   UN World conference against Racism 8.31.01   Durban, S.Africa   new 8.1.01 7.31.01 7.30.01 7.28.01 7.27.01 UN res. 3379 Cong. C.McKinney WCAR subject archive cultural issues HRts refs   §

US is setting a bad example, says Zuma
8.2.01   Business Day (S.Africa)

Meanwhile, the Democratic Alliance's (DA'S) request to form part of SA's official delegation to the conference was turned down, the preparatory committee for the conference said. "Delegations to the conference are not constituted as party political delegations. "All governments taking part will send their envoys as representatives of their countries," the committee said. "The same applies to our own country, with a government elected as the legitimate representative of the people," the committee said. Earlier this month the DA had asked to be included in the govt delegation. In a letter to President Thabo Mbeki on behalf of DA leader Tony Leon, the party's chief whip, Douglas Gibson, said that as the conference was not a party-political event, the SA delegation should be non-partisan.

U.N. Ambassadors Cite Progress 8.1.01   AP GENEVA   More than 100 countries preparing for a U.N. conference against racism have moved toward dropping clauses against Zionism from key documents as demanded by Israel and the United States, ambassadors said Wednesday. In an informal session of delegates chaired by South African Ambassador Sipho George Nene, only Syria held out against an agreement to eliminate the allegation that Zionism equals racism, Israeli Ambassador Yaakov Levy told The Associated Press. "The chairman expressed the sense of all participants but one that there were no room at Durban and in the resolutions for any kind of equation between Zionism and racism,'' Levy said. The World Conference Against Racism begins Aug. 31 in Durban, South Africa. Syrian Ambassador Toufik Salloum confirmed that he refused to go along on grounds that such a decision had to be taken in a formal meeting. "It is premature to conclude that we agreed that we are not going to raise the issue of comparison between racism and Zionism,'' Salloum said. At issue is the draft version of the main conference declaration, which revives a 1975 U.N. resolution equating Zionism, the movement behind the creation of the modern state of Israel, with racism. That resolution was rescinded in 1991. U.S. Sec.State Powell said Wednesday he would like to attend the conference, but he wants references to Israel and slavery changed. "We are not threatening to boycott,'' Powell said on CNN's Inside Politics. "The answer is let's fix this so that the conference will serve its intended purpose and the United States wants to be there.'' Earlier, State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said that while Powell wanted to attend the conference his participation depended on whether anti-Zionist and other objectionable phrases are removed. "Hopefully the text will be cleansed of any reference that brings back the memory of the infamous U.N. resolution equating Zionism with racism,'' Levy said. Unlike many U.N. battles where Israel's only ally is the United States, Levy said he has been "getting support from many other countries and I would hope sympathy and understanding from many others who for their own reasons might not say it publicly.'' Egyptian Ambassador Fayza Aboulnaga said she had told the meeting that as for Egypt, the anti-Zionism clause could be deleted because that wasn't the issue. But, she said, if there is reference to any specific problems anywhere in the world the document also must contain "compromise language that would reflect the current situation in the Palestinian occupied territories.'' White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said last week that the United States also vehemently opposed demands for compensation from countries that benefited in the past from slavery and colonialism. Levy said he is also working to remove "improper mentioning of the Holocaust and anti-Semitism.'' Much of the wording opposed by Israel was inserted by a regional meeting of Iran and Arab countries. Israel maintains that the "Holocaust'' should refer specifically to Nazi atrocities against the Jews, not genocide in general. One such disputed reference in the 30-page draft declaration says, "The holocausts/Holocaust and the ethnic cleansing of the Arab population in historic Palestine and in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo must never be forgotten.'' South Africa attempts to defuse zionism row 8.1.01   Reuters GENEVA   S.Africa, hosts of a coming World Conference on Racism, sought on Wednesday to defuse a row over Zionism & the MidEast that threatens to condemn the meeting to failure. The U.S. has said it will not go to the Durban meeting if Arab states insist on seeking to brand Zionism a racist doctrine. The European Union & other developed countries have warned they are not prepared to get bogged down in debate over Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands. S.African ambassador Sipho Nene chaired a special session on the MidEast on Wednesday during negotiations on draft texts for the Durban meeting, which the United Nations wants to make a turning point in the fight against racism. "South Africa was asked by the chairwoman of the conference drafting committee to see if we could make some progress on this," Nene told Reuters, but he declined to make any further comment on the closed-door session. The proposed inclusion of references to Zionism as racism and demands by some African countries for reparations for the wrongs of slavery have prompted the boycott warning from Washington. Egypt's ambassador told the closed-door session that Cairo would not press for Zionism to be included in a final draft, but senior diplomats said Syria did not echo its conciliatory tone. A European diplomat told Reuters the Syrian envoy had warned Nene against concluding that the issue had been resolved. "It was pretty much a re-statement of positions," the diplomat said. race against time Negotiators are in a race against time to reach at least a semblance of agreement on two lengthy draft texts, one a declaration of principles, the other a program of action, in time for the Aug. 31 conference. Drafting began around 2 years ago and should have been finalized in Geneva at the start of June, but negotiators were forced to schedule a final July 31 session to overcome still wide divisions. While acknowledging the seriousness of the conflict in the MidEast, where tensions have been further inflamed by Tuesday's killing of 8 Palestinians in an Israeli missile attack, the EU told the special session that Durban was not the forum to tackle the Palestinian issue. The draft declaration will condemn the horrors of slavery, which flourished between Africa & the Americas for over 200 years until the early 1800s, but the EU is no more willing than Washington to hear talk of specific reparations. The U.S. fears that any such link could open the floodgates to litigation in U.S. courts by groups representing the country's large African-American population. Other issues still proving troublesome include a bid by African states to rank victims of racism by degree of suffering, with slaves being those they consider to have fared worst. U.S. Pushes to Refocus Racism Conference 8.1.01   Neil A. Lewis NY Times WASHINGTON   State Dept officials said today that they have been engaged in a strenuous and complicated diplomatic effort to persuade other nations to omit two contentious issues from the agenda of a coming United Nations conference on racism, whether Zionism is racism and whether nations should pay reparations for slavery. The officials said the outcome of the negotiations would determine whether the Bush administration takes part in the conference, scheduled to open on Aug. 31 in Durban, South Africa. "We want to go," a State Department official said today. "But not at any cost." This week, a small corps of American diplomats is in Geneva attending sessions with conference planners about the agenda. However, the real negotiations, one administration official said, are expected to occur behind closed doors during the next few days as the diplomats press their argument that the inclusion of the two agenda items would subvert the conference and impede any progress. "It's our policy that we can't go to this conference unless we get these matters resolved somehow," a Bush administration official said today. The draft agenda, which includes language calling for reparations and equating Zionism with racism, was drawn up at several regional conferences called to prepare for the Durban meeting. Officials said the portion concerning Israel had emerged from a meeting of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, held in Iran. The question of whether the United States will send an official delegation, and, if it does, at what level, has engaged not only the State Dept, but several American civil rights groups, Jewish organizations and members of Congress. It has also revived a contentious debate about whether the notion that Zionism is racism can be a legitimate discussion topic or whether it is, as the U.S. has long contended, a rhetorical device for opponents of Israel to bludgeon Israel. The U.S. first condemned the effort to equate Zionism with racism in 1975, even as the UN General Assembly approved a motion affirming that notion. The UN repealed that resolution in 1991. International conferences also often become forums for a variety of international and parochial political agendas and concerns. The U.S. did not attend UN- sponsored conferences on racism in 1978 and 1983 because it disagreed with the language of the agenda. This time, the debate over Zionism and reparations on the agenda has the potential to stir up several problems including exacerbating friction between black and Jewish groups. That seemed evident today at a congressional hearing over whether the U.S. should attend. Blacks, both members of Congress and others who testified at the hearing, said it was imperative that the U.S. participate in the conference to demonstrate its concern over racism. Jewish lawmakers and representatives of Jewish groups expressed deep concern over the inclusion of language in a draft agenda that characterizes Israel's settlements as "crimes against humanity" and describes Zionism "as a movement based on racial superiority." Rep. Cynthia McKinney, Georgia Democrat and member of the House International Affairs Committee, which was conducting the hearing, said the Bush administration's reluctance to attend smacked of racism. "I have to wonder if the Bush administration's position on the World Conference on Racism is just politically dumb or if it is perhaps indicative some something more malignant," she said. "Is the Bush White House just full of latent racists?"   [ They are hardly latent when they use traffic checkpoints in the Florida 'hood to cut the opposition's electorate in national elections. a la Selection2K] Rep. Tom Lantos of California, also a Democratic member of the committee, criticized Ms. McKinney's remarks about Mr. Bush and outlined his own opposition to the conference. Mr. Lantos, a Holocaust survivor, said the U.S. should not attend the conference unless the agenda was changed. "We have a group of countries hellbent on hijacking a noble and worthwhile event into yet another forum for Israel-bashing and for the most extreme form of anti-Semitism to gain global notoriety," he said. On Monday, the House overwhelmingly passed a non-binding resolution sponsored by Mr. Lantos calling for the agenda to be changed before the U.S. agrees to attend. Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Charles E. Schumer, Democrats of New York, among others, have written to the White House urging that U.S. insist on having the language about Israel changed. Testifying before the committee today, William B. Wood, the acting assistant secretary of state for international organizations, said the offensive language about Israel was especially inflammatory. He also said that while no one should doubt the profound regret the U.S. feels over the "abomination of slavery," the administration opposes the idea of reparations.

Sparks fly in Congress over U.N. racism forum 8.1.01   Darryl Fears Wash.Post Washington   A congressional subcommittee hearing on the World Conference Against Racism opened Tuesday with praise for President Bush's threat to boycott the event if the issue of Zionism as racism is on the agenda. But as soon as the chairwoman, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), finished her opening statement, the subcommittee's ranking Democrat, Rep. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, denounced the president's plan to avoid the conference if another contentious issue, reparations for slavery and colonization, also is part of the discussion. Support for and opposition to the president's stance broke neatly along racial lines among the eight attending members of the House subcommittee on international operations and human rights. The hearing was the first public congressional meeting on the United Nations conference, scheduled to start Aug. 31 in Durban, South Africa. Ros-Lehtinen, who is white, questioned how reparations would be applied more than a century after U.S. slavery officially ended in the 1860s. But her most forceful blast was against the linkage of Zionism in Israel to racism. "There is perhaps no other issue which threatens the legitimacy and effectiveness of the World Conference Against Racism as does the hostile anti-Semitic/anti-Israel language shepherded by such countries as Iran, Iraq and Syria," she said. McKinney said the two issues were a smokescreen for what she perceived as the president's desire to avoid the subject of race. "I am becoming concerned that they really don't care about racism. I think the administration's opposition to WCAR is a clear example of their indifference to racism." William Wood, a State Department deputy assistant secretary, assured McKinney that the president supports the racism conference, but worries that the issues in question would overshadow other pressing concerns. Those worries deepened after a preparatory meeting in Geneva late Monday, when a nongovernmental body helping organize the conference proposed to condemn Israel for its ''escalation of the third holocaust perpetrated'' against the people of Palestine. That proposal drew harsh criticism from U.N. High Commissioner Mary Robinson, who's presiding over the 2 week long meeting. At the subcommittee meeting, critics of the proposal repeatedly used the word ''hijack'' to describe ''attempts by some Arabs'' to steer the conference against Israel. ''It is terribly wrong when, amongst all nations on this planet, only one, the state of Israel, is singled out,'' Rabbi Marvin Hier said in his testimony to the el. ''Of course, Israel is not above criticism, but how credible can this conference be when nations with horrible human rights violations … escape any criticism?'' U.S. Threatens to Boycott Racism Talks 8.1.01   Norman Kempster L.A. Times WASHINGTON   By threatening to boycott a U.N. conference on racism, the Bush administration is protesting efforts to equate Zionism with racism and to demand reparations for slavery. But critics say the tactic could backfire, isolating the United States from an international forum that will take place regardless. Although most human rights advocates agree with the administration's objections to the agenda, they are split on the wisdom of a boycott, with some urging the U.S. delegation to fight for its principles on the floor of the conference, scheduled to begin Aug. 31 in Durban, South Africa. Harold Koh, the State Dept's human rights chief in the Clinton administration, urged Sec.State Powell to lead a high-level U.S. delegation to the meeting. "I would have thought that the conference was a tailor-made situation for Colin Powell to attend and tell America's story," Koh, a Korean American, said of the African American secretary of State. In a telephone interview, Koh said the U.S. delegation should vigorously oppose both the Zionism & reparations resolutions, but he added that neither issue is a reason to stay away from the meeting. "One way to make sure that we are not consulted is not to go," he said. But others said the anti-Semitism of preliminary conference documents is so virulent that the only way to reverse the trend is to threaten a boycott. Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Ctr in Los Angeles, said the threat of a boycott is the best way to get the attention of the mostly Arab countries that he says want to turn the conference into an Israel-bashing session. "They are not going to change unless there is a tough stand," he said in a telephone interview. "If the U.S. announces that we are going no matter what, what kind of deterrent is that to countries" advocating anti-Israel positions? A team of U.S. diplomats is in Geneva, where preliminary work on the conference is being done, in an effort to reshape the focus of the talks. But if the diplomats fail, and time is growing short, President Bush will be forced to either go through with the threatened boycott or back away from it. Either decision will anger politically significant blocs of U.S. voters. Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson D-TX and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus introduced a resolution in the House urging the Bush administration to send a high-level delegation to the conference, regardless of the outcome of preliminary discussions. The resolution, which has yet to come to a vote, asserts that "the participation of the U.S. is in the national interest of the U.S. as an international leader and is vital to the success of the conference." White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said recently that the administration considers the meeting, officially called the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, a "historic opportunity … to create a new climate to fight racism." "The representatives of the U.S. govt have their bags packed and are ready to go and attend this conference," Fleischer said. "The only thing stopping them from going will be if the conferees divert the conference from its important mission … and get into issues such as equating Zionism with racism or engaging in issues facing backward on reparations." U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan appeared to back Washington's position when he told the Urban League this week: "The conference must help heal old wounds without reopening them. It must confront the past, but most importantly, it must help set a new course against racism in the future." But in Geneva on Monday, representatives of the nongovermental organizations that are planning to attend the Durban conference as observers approved a declaration that describes Israel as "an apartheid, racist and fascist state" that is conducting a "third holocaust … against the people of Palestine." They said the U.S. & Britain share the blame for "initiating a flimsy peace process" that gives Israel diplomatic cover for what they called atrocities. The nongovermental communique is far less important than the formal declaration to be adopted by govt delegations, but critics of the conference say it indicates which way the wind is blowing. Although the reparations issue is also objectionable to Bush, the make-or-break dispute is over Zionism. Israel is the only country singled out in pre-conference draft declarations. Organizers agreed long ago to avoid direct criticism of any country. Tom Malinowski, advocacy director of the Washington office of Human Rights Watch, said that if conference delegates want to start naming individual countries, the U.S. can play that game with skill and determination. "There are ways to do it," he said. "I'd call in the Arab ambassadors and say, 'If you want to single out Israel, be prepared, because we are going to come to the conference and talk about Egyptian discrimination against Copts, Syrian discrimination against Kurds, Sudanese discrimination against people with dark skins and so forth.' If they did that, it would be tough. And it would work." On Capitol Hill, the House voted 408 to 3 on Monday for a resolution sponsored by Rep. Tom Lantos, D-San Mateo CA, praising the objectives of the conference but denouncing "the divisive and discredited notion equating Zionism with racism." Although the resolution doesn't mention a possible U.S. boycott, Lantos aides say the U.S. should participate only if Zionism is taken off the table. Lantos, a staunch Democrat and frequent critic of the administration, planned to fly to Geneva today to support the U.S. effort to change the agenda. Racism conf. stirring controversy in US Congress 8.1.01   James Butty VOA Washington   The U.N.-sponsored World Conference Against Racism is not until August 31, but the debate about what topics to discuss is heating up. The controversy was evident Tuesday on Capitol Hill during a hearing of the House of Representatives International Relations Committee. Among the objectives of the upcoming racism conference is to increase the level of awareness about racism and U.N. activities aimed at combating racism. But it was clear during the hearing that the mere definition of racism has become a problem for some countries, particularly the United States. Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-FL, chair of the Subcommittee on International Operations and Human Rights, describes the points of disagreement. "The 2 pivotal issues which have dominated the pre-World Conference discussions are: reparations and compensation for victims of slavery and the anti-semitic/anti-Israel provisions which permeate throughout the draft document," she said. "Such attempts to equate 'Zionism with Racism' undermined the two previous world conferences on the issue of racism." Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen says the two issues were complex with far-reaching ramifications. She hoped the hearing would have a positive impact on the drafting of the final documents. Cong. Cynthia McKinney, D-GA and ranking member of the subcommittee, said she was surprised that the Bush administration has been critical of the World Conference against Racism. "I find the Bush administration's public criticism of the WCAR at odds with his carefully crafted public image, created for him by his minders: that is, the 'compassionate conservative,' a uniter not a divider. The Bush administration could use the WCAR to publicly show a commitment to end racism in this country. Given that 30 percent of the U.S. population consists of people of color and that we have all experienced racism first hand, I have to wonder if the Bush administration's position on the WCAR is just politically dumb or if it is perhaps indicative of something more malignant." Congresswoman McKinney said the World Conference Against Racism provides a perfect opportunity for the Bush administration to show a clear commitment to preserving and extending civil rights in the United States. And she warned that if the President fails to provide a serious commitment to the conference, African Americans would show their disapproval in the presidential election in 2004. Testifying for the Bush administration was William Wood, Deputy Asst Sec.State for international organization affairs. Mr. Wood said the Bush administration is not against the World Conference against Racism, but it is opposed to its language. "The U.S. has consistently opposed the call for reparations for a variety of reasons, and will continue to do so," he said. "There is no consensus in the U.S. on payment of reparations [for slavery]. It is not clear what would be the legal or practical effect of a call of reparations for injustices more than a century old. Nor is it clear that such a call would contribute to eliminate racism in the contemporary world." Mr. Wood said the U.S. has a positive agenda for fighting against racism, including elimination of racial profiling, diversity in all aspects of law enforcement, and prohibiting violence motivated by race, color, or descent.

UN conference stumbles on Zionism, slavery reparations
7.31.01   Elizabeth Armstrong CS Monitor

The US is certainly not the sole objector. Beijing opposes putting treatment of Tibetans on the program, and the Indian government is balking at any examination of its caste system as a form of racism. The UNs has held several conferences pertaining to racism in the past, from a 1948 convention on genocide to a 1973 convention on apartheid, but never has one conference attempted to discuss an issue as broad as racism, intolerance, and resulting inequities. The conference dispute comes as the US has withdrawn from a germ warfare treaty, the Kyoto Protocol, and on the heels of being voted off the UN Human Rights Commission. To critics, such moves underscore a growing unilateralism by the US on a range of issues. To supporters, it shows the US is unwilling to go along with the global consensus if it believes the prevailing view is wrong.
The conference, formally titled the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, breaks the agenda into five general themes. But a key sticking point for the US and other nations is the core objective, a declaration that "solemnly acknowledges the wrongs of the past, notes the current manifestations ... and commits States and peoples to moving forward together in the fight against racism." The U.S. is joined by some European countries in opposing any discussion of the African demand that countries that prospered from slavery and colonization should apologize, and pay compensation for their actions.

Others in the US insist that American participation in the conference is imperative, even if there is disagreement about language. "By attending the conference, the president could really go a long way into healing racial problems in America," says the Rev. Theodore Williams at the Baltimore chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. (NAACP). "If President Bush is willing to discuss reparations for slavery, then he's in essence admitting that slavery is wrong, and to some degree legitimizing monetary compensation. Maybe he's not prepared to do that." Yet it should be expected that countries across the globe will find fault with at least one issue the conference intends to raise, says Terri Johnson, head of the Human Relations Foundation of Chicago. "There's always this notion that the United States is doing better than everybody else. Should this conversation be one of degrees? Is that appropriate? How do you say 'we're not coming because we don't like what's on the agenda?' Nobody should like what's on the agenda. Comfort shouldn't be on the table."

The Bush administration says it has every intention of participating - provided certain changes be made. "The only thing stopping [US delegates] from going will be if the conferees divert the conference from its important mission of fighting racism," says Mr. Fleischer. Such diversions "serve to divide nations as opposed to bring people together," he says, adding that the conference should focus on current problems, and "not get lost in the tangle that is presented by trying to address long-ago inequity." But such inequity, Williams warns, is not so far removed from America today. "We're talking about people working for hundreds of years without any compensations," Williams says. "Subsequent generations started with nothing, and we're still trying to build an economic base. We use reparations to repair the lives of Jewish people and Native Americans. We've compensated Japanese Americans. It's an old topic, and it has precedent."

U.S. boycott risk overhangs U.N. anti-racism meet
7.30.01   Reuters   ¹

U.S. warning
Washington made it clear on Friday it would not go to Durban if either Zionism or the question of compensation for slavery were on the table at Durban. The U.S., whose views are echoed by most developed states, fears that any suggestion of financial compensation could expose it to a wave of litigation at home. Some radical African- American groups have already raised the possibility of settlements along the lines of reparations paid out to victims, mainly Jews, of atrocities committed by Nazi Germany during WWII. Robinson said it was crucial the Durban conference fully address past wrongs, particularly slavery which flourished between Africa and the Americas for over 200 years until early last century. "It is essential to recognize these wrongs...we must come to terms with the past to move forward," she said.
While avoiding going into detail, she expressed optimism some agreement could be reached between the mainly African states calling for compensation and former colonial powers. "With good will and realistic approaches I feel the gap between the differing views can be bridged," she said. But delegations, representing most U.N. states, have little time in which to whittle down two draft texts for a proposed declaration on racism and another outlining a plan of action. Besides slavery & Zionism, there are several other controversial issues that could test the conference. Arab states want to raise the question of Israeli occupation of Arab lands, while India is anxious to avoid the question of caste, a system of discrimination which has been officially abolished but which critics say is still rife.

US participation in Racism Conference doubtful 7.28.01   Charles Cobb, Jr allAfrica.com Washington, DC   As the 3rd Preparatory Committee meeting of the World Conference against Racism got underway in Geneva, Monday, to work on a draft Declaration and Program of Action, U.S. participation in the Durban, South Africa conference remained in doubt, although efforts to reach a compromise are underway. In a speech at the National Urban League Conference in Washington DC, Monday, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan called for "common ground" to be found. Although the past should not be forgotten, the U.N. leader said, "the conference must help heal old wounds without ignoring them." The United States objects to references equating Zionism with racism and to inclusion on the agenda of reparations for colonialism& slavery. White House spokesperson Ari Fleischer told reporters Friday that the U.S. position was that the conference "should be focused on the future on combating racism that exists in the world today," instead of trying to "revisit a very tangled issue." These were "serious concerns" a State Department spokesperson said after Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, Marc Grossman, met with some 40 foreign ambassadors to explain the US position on Friday last week. The US has threatened to boycott the meeting and to deny it funding if planners insist on placing the two issues on the conference agenda. "The President is committed to going and to attending this conference," said Fleischer. "The representatives of the United States government have their bags packed and they're ready to go and attend this conference. The only thing stopping them from going will be if the conferees divert the conference from its important mission of fighting racism and get into issues such as equating Zionism with racism, or engaging in issues facing backwards on reparations that serve to divide nations." At a roundtable discussion last week, black lawmakers in the US Congress criticized the Bush administration for not taking the lead in putting reparations on the table. Calling slavery one of the greatest crimes of all time, Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) said; "Our nation has refused to confront the enormity of this crime." Such a position, "is not radical," added Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-CA), "it's right." Many observers think that the 'Zionism as racism' item will be dropped but that the reparations issue may remain on the agenda in some modified way. Few think that President Bush will attend the conference.

US threatens to boycott UN racism conference over slavery compensation 7.28.01 Rupert Cornwell Independent Digital (UK) Ltd The US is threatening to boycott a major UN conference on racism next month because Washington strongly objects to 2 items that could be on the agenda: reparations for slavery, and Zionism. Washington's critics will take the move as further evidence of what they see as the Bush administration's contempt for international initiatives and treaties. The meeting, which starts in Durban on 31 August, is being billed as the most important step yet in the fight against racism. It will involve the former colonial powers formally acknowledging their past sins of slavery and exploitation. But yesterday ambassadors from more than 30 countries were summoned to the State Dept to be informed of the US position, and aides of Sec.State C.Powell, who is travelling in Asia, said that Washington's participation would depend on how the 3 issues were resolved. Everything now hinges on this week's preparatory talks in Geneva, to be chaired by Mary Robinson, the UN's High Commissioner for Human Rights and the moving spirit behind the conference, which will settle the agenda for the Durban conference. Mrs Robinson herself has warned that the inclusion of Zionism, a topic which dates back to a 1975 UN resolution equating Zionism with racism, would doom the conference to failure. In fact the resolution was overturned in 1991, but with their relations with Israel in turmoil, several Arab states want to use the occasion to condemn the Jewish state's treatment of Palestinians as racist, and to brand Zionism as the equivalent of apartheid. The issue of slavery reparations is scarcely less sensitive. No one objects to the strong condemnation of the slave trade which the conference is likely to adopt. But several African countries want to go further and seek specific financial compensation for their sufferings in colonial times. This in turn would give new impetus to lawsuits that have been threatened by individuals & groups of black Americans in the US. African leaders, incl S.African President, Thabo Mbeki, want the conference to lead to an apology, which some observers believe could open the door to compensation claims. Between the 17th and 19th centuries up to 15 million people were forcibly taken from Africa as slaves. Most were taken to the Americas. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said President GWBush opposed reparations for slavery. "This conference should be focused on the future, on combating racism that exists in the world today," he said. It was wrong to "try to revisit a very tangled issue, that gets into complications such as what West African nations that were involved in the slave trade should pay reparations".

Anti-Zion push threatens race summit 7.27.01   B.Pisik & N.Kralev Wash.Times NEW YORK   The United Nations' top human rights official said yesterday that an Arab resolution calling Zionism racist could derail the upcoming world conference on racism. "If there is an attempt to revive a Zionism-as-racism [resolution], we will not have a successful conference," U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson told reporters in Geneva. The U.S. & Israel strongly protested the language of the resolution pushed by Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. The Bush administration yesterday issued its strongest warning to date that the U.S. will not attend the Aug. 31-Sept. 7 conference in Durban, S.Africa, if the anti-Zionism language is not removed from the draft agenda. The U.S. also strongly objects to a second proposal calling for countries that prospered in the past from slavery to formally apologize and pay unspecified reparations. Britain is also reportedly considering downgrading its delegation to protest the drift of the agenda negotiations. "The U.S. stands on the side of principle," White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said yesterday. "And the U.S. can stand on the side of making certain that a variety of Third World nations do not hijack a conference that should be aimed at combating racism, and under the guise of combating racism turn this into a conference that itself smacks of anti-Semitism," Mr. Fleischer said. Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Marc Grossman & other administration officials yesterday briefed about two dozen foreign diplomats on U.S. concerns for 45 minutes at a State Department meeting. "We do want the conference to succeed," a State Department official said on background after the meeting. "We support it, and we hope to be able to attend. That said, we have serious concerns." The official added that the U.S. was planning to send a "strong delegation" headed by Asst Sec.State for Democracy, Human Rights & Labor Lorne Craner to the conference- preparatory meetings, which begin in Geneva on Monday. "Once that's over, and we have had a chance to have conversations ... we'll look again at where we stand and be in a better position to determine the extent & level of our participation in Durban," the official said. Mrs. Robinson has been traveling the world to build support for the proposed World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia & Related Intolerance. She met with Mr. Arafat on the sidelines of the Organization for African Unity summit in Lusaka, Zambia, two weeks ago. She indicated that he was receptive to her message. "He wanted a successful outcome in Durban. I'm not going to put other words in his mouth. He was very positive, and I found it very encouraging.'' U.S. & Israeli officials have been campaigning to remove the language, which calls Zionism a form of apartheid and condemns the Jewish state as racist. American & many European nations are also deeply concerned about African-sponsored draft language that describes the slave trade as a "crime against humanity" and asks for unspecified compensation to be paid by those who benefited from trafficking in human beings. Western industrial nations, many of them with colonial histories, say the racism conference should address problems that exist today. Arab nations, acting with the concurrence of Asian govts, drafted the anti-Zionist language at a February meeting in Tehran. American diplomats characterize it as more insidious than the "Zionism-equals-racism" language that was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly in 1975 and was not repealed until 1991. "This would be a throwback to a position that was rejected 10 years ago by the international community if this conference takes this unwise step," Mr. Fleischer said. Diplomats from scores of countries will gather in Geneva on Monday for a final attempt to agree on a broad range of contested issues. They include slavery reparations, the caste system, treatment of indigenous peoples, asylum for refugees and limits on political parties & advertising that implicitly advocate one group over another.

U.S. warns it may skip conference on racism 7.27.01   D. Fears & A. Sipress Wash.Post The U.S. will not attend next month's World Conference Against Racism if two contentious issues are included in the conference agenda, a senior State Dept official said yesterday. Top State Dept officials plan to inform 3 dozen foreign diplomats today of the Bush's administration's position on the issues of Zionism as racism, and reparations for slavery & colonialism, the official said. The Washington-based ambassadors, representing several continents, are expected to meet in Foggy Bottom with Marc Grossman, undersecretary of state for political affairs, and Undersecretary of State Paula J. Dobriansky. They intend to tell the ambassadors that the U.S. needs their help to build support for striking the two topics. "We need to be really clear about our position," the senior State Dept official said. "We don't want anybody to be surprised when they look up on the day of Durban and wonder why we're not there." The absence of the U.S. would be a severe blow to the convention, which is being billed as the most important international discussion of race ever held. Formally titled the UN Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, it is scheduled to start Aug. 31 for an 8 day run in the coastal S.African city of Durban. The State Dept official's statement was the latest warning about the conference by the Bush administration, which has voiced its displeasure over the agenda for months. And it was a firm message to Mary Robinson, the conference's top organizer and the UN high commissioner for human rights, who on Monday will start the last round of meetings in Geneva to discuss the agenda. A five-member State Dept team will attend those discussions, a White House official said."I am aware that there are quite a number of hurdles," Robinson said yesterday from Geneva. She met twice with Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, in February and June, and once with national security adviser Condoleezza Rice in February. What she heard in those meetings, she said, was encouraging. Robinson & other conference advocates have said that the 2 issues in question are only proposals for the agenda. Some African Americans and African nations have said they are due reparations from countries that participated in the slave trade during the 1700s & early 1800s. The dispute over Zionism goes back to a 1975 U.N. resolution equating it with racism. The resolution was repealed 10 years ago, but some Arab organizations proposed similar language for the conference's draft declaration. Whether the proposals will be adopted is an open question. The issues are "being discussed by small teams of negotiators behind closed doors," Robinson said. "They face a considerable challenge because time is short." Amnesty Intl and Human Rights Watch are among the organizations imploring Bush to send a delegation to the conference. Others include the NAACP, the National Urban League and the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights. "I think . . . that the U.S. should be at the conference," said Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP's Washington bureau. "I think this is an important opportunity to address these issues of race. It's something that many of us have been actively engaged in preparing for." Others had stronger words. Wade Henderson, director of the Leadership Conference, said the U.S. lost its seat on the UN Human Rights Commission and was left out of the Kyoto pollution accord "because of a lack of leadership." That is becoming part of the administration's form, said Rep. Cynthia McKinney D-GA "The Bush administration ought to get accustomed to standing alone," she said. "Hopefully they will choose to join the rest of the world and not choose to stand alone in isolation." A Jewish member of the conference steering committee sided with Bush. "I think the U.S. should vigorously protest," said Rabbi Marvin Hire, founder & dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Ctr of Los Angeles. "If it's going to be a circus, the U.S. should send a very low-level delegation." "The Arab bloc

really wants to hijack the conference," he said. "I'm afraid the entire conference is going to be just a lot of shouting that has nothing to do with issues today because of the frustration over what's going on in the Middle East."

Others believe the trouble with the conference lies in its planning. Its plan for action was adopted in March, leaving little time to organize the event. An equivalent document for the World Conference on Women, held in September 1995 in Beijing, had been adopted 13 months before. The Conference on Women, though controversial, was ushered in with an outpouring of fanfare and money. The Clinton administration donated nearly $6 million to the event, and then-first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton was one of 50,000 attendees.
By contrast, the Conference Against Racism has been greeted with near silence in the media. President Clinton donated $250,000 on his way out of office, and the Bush administration has shown no intention to increase that sum. Only some 10,000 conference attendees are expected in Durban. Robinson said the conference could be a success, especially if it resulted in a plan to deal with racism in the future. "This is not an easy conference to prepare for," Robinson said. "We have never addressed together the darker side of our society: racism, anti- Semitism, the mistreatment of immigrants, the riots in London by Asian youth and problems in Germany. It is a difficult issue."

In the U.S., civil rights activists say a discussion of slavery & reparations would be an uncomfortable one that the Bush administration should not avoid. Henderson, of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, said the issue should remain on the table. "I believe that democratic principles are advanced amid vigorous and open debate," he said. One such debate involving the conference against racism would have taken place at a congressional hearing earlier this week, but the Wednesday meeting of the House subcommittee on international operations was postponed until Tuesday by its chair, Rep. I.Ros-Lehtinen R-FL.
The postponement prompted a barrage of charges from McKinney, a senior member of the committee. She said the Bush administration officials who were slated to testify would be in Geneva next week, as would conference advocates who were to attend the hearing. "The bottom line is that the Republicans maneuvered to protect the Bush administration from any overt criticism with respect to the world conference," McKinney said. "The Republicans in the House subverted the bipartisan way in which we've been working almost for an entire year. They want to prevent black people from having an opportunity to discuss the World Conference Against Racism in an official setting."

Aides to Ros-Lehtinen disputed that claim, saying that a key committee staffer had to travel out of the city for a family funeral. A spokesman for the committee said that such postponements were common, and that some had been made on McKinney's behalf. Upon hearing that explanation, McKinney said, "It's an affront. The nation's business doesn't stop for any reason. There is no excuse for four weeks of planning being pulled out from under us a day before the hearing."

resolution 3379   º

Jamilla Asla, whose son Asil was killed during Oct. riots in Arrabe, being comforted by relatives at the Or Commission hearings yesterday following the testimony of the policeman she believes killed her son. Jamilla & husband Hassan were evicted from courtroom for disrupting proceedings. Hassan shouted at Chief Inspector Yitzhak Shimoni "I will be your curse; I will pursue you all my life." Jamilla ran to the glass wall concealing Shimoni's identity & begged commission … (sic)   'Vandalism by police was never probed'   8.3.01   Ori Nir Ha'aretz (Israel) Israel Police never investigated complaints filed by Arab residents of Jedaida regarding alleged vandalism by police 10.1.00 according to testimony heard yesterday by the Or Commission investigating Arab riots last Oct. and the police's response. Residents of the Galilee village, incl Mayor Sallah Akar, claimed Galilee Region police systematically broke house & car windows that night, sometimes by firing rubber-coated bullets at them. Residents complained to the Acre police station commander & his deputy the next day, and these officials promised Akar that the complaints would be investigated. To this day, however, no investigation has ever taken place. Acre station commander Chief Superintendent Roni Attiya told the commission that he is convinced his policemen would not commit such vandalism. Instead, he believes the damage was caused by Arab rioters throwing stones at policemen entering the village. Attiya, the main witness of yesterday's session, also repeated the statements made Wed. by his counterpart at the Shfaram police station, Chief Superintendent Baruch Drimer that today, 10 months later, the police would still not be able to cope effectively with large-scale riots such as those of last October. The manpower at his disposal, Attiya said, "was insufficient then and would be insufficient today."

Shin Bet denies Palestinian treatment, citing 'security'   8.3.01   Joseph Algazy Ha'aretz (Israel) The Shin Bet is preventing a Kalkilya resident from going to Austria for urgent medical treatment, so a leading human rights group is now demanding that he be provided with free medical care in an Israeli hospital. According to members of his family, Firas Rushdi Obeid, 27, was hurt in an accident in his home and is in danger of losing the use of his fingers, his family says. Doctors in Nablus & Amman recommended that he go to Austria. The family asked for a travel permit for Obeid & his brother from the District Coordinating Office in Kalkilya but it was refused. When Physicians for Human Rights intervened on behalf of Obeid, they were told by the Defense Ministry that Obeid's request was turned down for security reasons. The physicians' group has now appealed to the ministers of health & defense to permit the man to be treated at an Israeli hospital free of charge.

"If we are forced to cope with such incidents again, our only advantage would be experience," he said. "We haven't improved in terms of manpower, in terms of means [to disperse demonstrators] or in terms of protective equipt. I am very unhappy with the protective & crowd dispersal equipt used by the Israel Police," he continued. "I assume there are much more effective ways to disperse a crowd, but in the Israel Police, they don't exist." Attiya, like most of the policemen who have testified, said he had never before seen such violent riots. This produced an uncharacteristically sarcastic response from the commission chair, Supreme Court Justice Theodor Or. "We are familiar with this sentence from all the testimony," he said. Another Acre police officer who testified yesterday, Inspector Yossi Baraby, told the commission he had fired rubber-coated bullets at the Jedaida demonstrators, even though "I hadn't a clue" what police regulations said about the distances at which such bullets may be used. Baraby also said he fired live bullets in the air at one point when he felt himself endangered.

Colleagues defeated resolution 406-3
7.27.01   Dear Colleague:

In response, I have introduced House Resolution 211, which states the significance and importance of the conference. Further, H. Res. 211 simply urges the following of the Bush Administration:
That Secretary of State Colin Powell lead the U.S. delegation to the WCAR in Durban, South Africa in order to heighten the delegation's stature and to demonstrate to the world the seriousness with which the U.S. approaches not only the WCAR, but the global situation of racial discrimination.

That the Administration increase support for the WCAR by providing financial assistance in support of the conference, and to insure that such assistance is consistent with previous commitments the U.S. has made to similar fora. That the Administration adopt policy positions at the WCAR that seek to advance an understanding of current and historic factors contributing to racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related intolerance.

It is essential that the U.S. play the same leading role in the World Conference Against Racism that it seeks and maintains in other international organizations and conventions. As I am confident that you share my belief that racism and discrimination is a scourge in our global society, please support H. Res. 211.

Sincerely,
Eddie Bernice Johnson, Member of Congress
Cynthia McKinney, Member of Congress

§ite map courtesy of FreeFind

presented by §

OCIAL JUSTICE