Boycott of meeting on racism likely by U.S

Brad Mayer bradley.mayer at ebay.sun.com
Thu Aug 16 09:53:05 PDT 2001


Question: Why is the U.S. concerned, to the tune of a 408-3 vote in the US House? (If one were to say "should", one might end up on Berlets' list of "unconscious Buchananites").

BTW, it is HR 212, (easily found on Thomas, try 'Lantos' and 'racism') and the operative sentence states:

"Whereas the attempt by some to use the WCAR as a platform to resuscitate the divisive and discredited notion equating Zionism with racism, a notion that was overwhelmingly rejected by United Nations Resolution 3379 (1991), would undermine the goals and objectives of the conference; and .."

The date -1991 - is no coincidence, of course. It certainly is time to restore the old resolution, especially in conjunction with the raising of the issue of apologies and reparations for African slavery, something else the US opposes bringing up (but takes a different diplomatic tack on, given the differing relation of African-American organizations to the US).

The Nays (Dems, unless indicated by an 'R'), : Conyers, McKinney, Paul(R) Not Voting: Baca, Jefferson, Spence(R), Baker(R), Kleczka, Stark, Cubin(R), Lipinski, Stenholm, DeGette, Mollohan, Udall (CO), Goode(R), Rivers, Waters, Hansen(R), Schaffer(R), Hefley(R), Snyder ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Boycott of meeting on racism likely U.S. remains opposed to Arab stance

Thursday, August 16, 2001

URL:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/08/16/MN70197.DTL

Washington -- Just two weeks before the

scheduled start of a United Nations conference on

racism, little progress has been made on the United

States' threatened boycott over an effort by Arab

nations to single out Israel for diplomatic attack.

Rep. Tom Lantos, D-San Mateo, whose resolution

calling for an official U.S. boycott over the issue

passed the House on July 30 by a 408-to-3 vote,

met yesterday with Secretary of State Colin Powell

to discuss the conference.

Lantos, the ranking Democrat on the House

International Relations Committee,

also met with Egyptian diplomats. Asked if

American objections can be met in time, Lantos

said, "I would doubt it."

The eight-day U.N. Conference against Racism,

Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related

Intolerance is due to open in Durban, South Africa,

on Aug. 31.

The differences are particularly sharp over language

dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.

Language drafted by Arab states originally

resurrected wording equating Zionism with racism.

A U.N. General Assembly resolution making that

link was adopted in 1975, over American

objections, but was repealed in 1991.

At a preparatory conference last week in Geneva,

the wording was softened somewhat. But a draft

circulated at the meeting still referred to Israel's

"racist policies" in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and

Golan Heights and equated the Holocaust with

"ethnic cleansing of the Arab population in historic

Palestine and the Golan."

"Some radical governments and groups are in the

process of hijacking the conference and making it

into a conference against Israel," Lantos said. "To

single out any country is an outrage. No nation

comes to the conference with clean hands."

The congressman, a Holocaust survivor born in

Hungary, is particularly upset over any comparison

between the policies of Nazi Germany and Israel.

The State Department's most recent comment on

the conference came Monday when spokesman

Philip Reeker said, "We are disappointed that the

preparatory conference was unable to reach an

agreement in Geneva."

He said that contacts continue to try to work out an

agreeable wording, and that an announcement on

U.S. participation is expected by next week.

South Africa is especially eager for Powell, the first

African American to serve as secretary of state, to

attend the conference as a symbolic point about

race relations. But the State Department has said

Powell won't go if U.S.

objections aren't met.

Hussein Ibish of the American-Arab

Anti-Discrimination Committee said Washington

has no reason to avoid sending a high-level

delegation.

"We should go there under virtually any

circumstances. There is certainly nothing on the

agenda as it now stands that can serve as a reason

not to go," Ibish said.

He said it is proper for the conference to discuss

Israel's policies toward the Palestinians. "It is racial

discrimination without parallel in the world today.

Every aspect of life there is regulated by who you

are, what group you belong to."

"It cries out for some kind of examination at a U.N.

conference on racism," added Ibish.

Another early conference-related dispute -- over

slavery -- appears closer to resolution. Originally,

African nations pushed for wording calling on the

West to apologize and make reparations for

slavery.

Washington sources say that has been softened to

expressions of regret for slavery, along with efforts

to redress past wrongs, but not promising

reparations.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list