Durban Review Summary: September 18, 2008
“WJC official: Jews must engage Durban II”
September 13, 2008, Jerusalem Post, Haviv Rettig
Unlike other Jewish NGOs which have chosen to avoid the preparatory meetings for the Durban Review Conference, Peleg Reshef, director of the World Jewish Congress’ World Jewish Diplomatic Corps, believes their participation may have a strong impact.
Referring to last month’s African Preparatory Meeting in Abuja, Nigeria, Reshef said: “I think we made a big contribution. We were very involved in dealing with other NGOs.” UN Watch was the only other Jewish NGO in attendance.
Reshef asserts that the African Preparatory Meeting was a good opportunity “for stepping out of the circle of the Jewish caucus and joining hands with authentic human rights groups who will march with us if we march with them on issues we agree on. We can influence the process that will culminate in the conference itself.”
Reshef claims that it is important to participate in the preliminary meetings, as “The agenda is decided in the preparations; it’s not just about what happens in Geneva, but about how the NGOs, human rights organizations and governments organize for it.” However, as revealed by the document produced at the end of the meeting, the agenda of the Durban Review Conference seems to be heading the same way as that of the 2001 World Conference Against Racism. Specifically, the document mentions only “the plight of the Palestinians” while ignoring all local human rights abuses and proposes a limitation on freedom of speech.
Member of Parliament Calls for Australian Boycott of the Durban Review Conference
September 14, 2008, News.com.au, Chris Pepper
Federal Member of Parliament for South Australia, Christopher Pyne, demanded in a Sunday Mail column that “the Australian Government refuse to attend the event, the Durban Review Conference.” He claims that by attending the conference, Australia would legitimize and “add to the event’s credibility [...] In my view, by attending, we tacitly sign up to a warped view of racism.” Pyne suspects that the Durban Review Conference will be another forum for anti-Israel activity. “The portents for a fair approach to Israel aren’t good [...] We should take the lead with Canada.”
Allen Bolaffi, President of the Australia-Israel Chamber of Commerce, supports Pyne’s stance, but adds that if the conference is committed to avoiding the demonization of Israel, Australia’s participation would allow it to have a significant impact on its outcome.
“Durban II prep conference called a concern”
September 18, 2008, The Canadian Jewish News, Paul Lungen
UN Watch has written to Navanethem Pillay, High Commissioner for Human Rights, asking that she retract her comment that the “conference process has been the subject of ferocious, and often distorted, criticism by certain lobby groups focused on single issues.” According to Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch, “the statement ‘play[ed] on imagery reminiscent of that which circulated in Durban in 2001… and intended to discredit and delegitimize those who raise questions about the abuses in the Durban II process’.” Neuer believes that without the threatened boycott of the Durban Review Conference by Canada and other Western countries, the document produced by the African preparatory meeting would have been much worse than its mention of the “plight of the Palestinians” and its omission of African crimes of racism and genocide.
The Canadian Jewish Congress Prioritizes Durban II
September 18, 2008, The Canadian Jewish News, Paul Lungen
The Canadian Jewish Congress has recently appointed a new national executive director and general counsel. As part of his duties, Benjamin Shinewald will handle the preparations for the Durban Review Conference. “Even before he got there, Congress had identified the Durban II conference as posing potential problems for the Canadian Jewish community, and it has been working with contacts in other communities to minimize the fallout domestically.” The Canadian Jewish Congress is concerned that the Durban Review Conference may be a repeat of the 2001 World Conference against Racism, in terms of the virulent anti-Israel activity taking place there. It has therefore identified it as one of its top priorities for the coming months.
“Religion and Freedom of Expression in the Human Rights Council”
September 17 2008, EuropeNews, Naser Khader
In this article, Khader criticizes the United Nations Human Rights Council for limiting the freedom of expression, thus contributing to the erosion of democracy. He refers to the upcoming Durban Review Conference, claiming that “The Islamists ha[ve] hijacked the agenda [...] Durban II is being prepared by the ambassador of Libya of all places,” while Denmark was recently refused membership in the Human Rights Council. Indeed, the document prepared by the African Preparatory Meeting in Nigeria singles out Israel for condemnation and ignores African violations of human rights.
He goes on to assert that “Islam critic NGO’es [sic] are not allow[ed] in to the conference.” Indeed, the Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy was refused accreditation by the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the UN, which grants NGOs the authorization to participate in the conference and preparatory meetings. He concludes “Now with Durban II it seems clear to me, that the UN has become the new arena for Islamism led by some totalitarian nations. I don’t think we realize how we with Durban II give the Islamist legitimacy.”
