The Obama Administration Double-Deals On Israel
Anne Bayefsky, 03.01.09, 01:59 PM EST
Anti-Semitism, ‘Islamophobia,’ Durban II and the U.N.
(HH here: lets start off by saying that I do not agree with the spin on this article. It does contain valuable information however and even the author has trouble completely convincing herself of her own premise. I continue to see Obama trying to use the power of the U.S. constructively if possible. But a note to those who still think him traitor; another drone killed 8 militants in Pakistan shortly after Obama’s envoy spoke with the Pakistani leadership. MY take is that he is exploring WHETHER the U.S. can actually moderate the extremes of Durban and return it to it’s original intent:; human rights. IF Obama engages, fails and stages a walkout it will damage the conference more than if he stayed away altogether. I am not happy about the lack of provisions about holocaust denial but that can be added later. I am sure the administration is watching closely to see just how much influence we can have before dropping the whole thing. You can Read the whole article by clicking on the post title. Forbes in it’s wisdom demands a registration. Use mine! the name is thorin oakenshield iV and the password is password.)
Durban II, scheduled for Geneva in April, is the U.N.’s attempt at a rerun of the 2001 global anti-Semitic hate fest held in Durban, South Africa.
After sowing confusion over the phone lines, the State Department chose late Friday night to put the real deal in print. Their release reads: “the current text of the draft outcome document is not salvageable,” and “the United States will not … participate in a conference based on this text,” but we will “re-engage if a document that meets [our] criteria becomes the basis for deliberations.” A new version must be: “shorter,” “not reaffirm in toto the flawed 2001 Durban Declaration,” “not single out any one country or conflict,” and “not embrace the troubling concept of “defamation of religion.”
And by the way, it continued, the U.S. will “participate” for the first time in the U.N. Human Rights Council.
The Durban Declaration claims that Palestinians are victims of Israeli racism; with Israel the only U.N. state charged with racism. The end game, as 2001 attendee Yasser Arafat made plain, is to analogize Israel to apartheid South Africa, pile on political isolation and sanctions and defeat Israel politically, if not militarily. The purpose of Durban II, as decided in August 2007 with the consent of the European Union, is to “foster the implementation of the Durban Declaration.” In January of this year, the E.U. agreed to “reaffirm” the Durban Declaration “as it was adopted at the 2001 World Conference.” Durban II cannot be salvaged; its very raison d’être includes demonizing Israel.
In fact, Obama’s four deal-breakers do not include many other troubling provisions still on Durban II’s negotiating table. These include: questioning the veracity of the Holocaust, a variety of attacks on freedom of expression in addition to “defamation of religion,” and incendiary claims of “Islamophobia”–the general allegation of a racist Western plot to discriminate against all Muslims.
The administration’s decision to slip in the Human Rights Council as a consolation prize for Durban enthusiasts is an attempt to downplay a major move. State Department officials intimated that they intend not only to observe but to run for a seat–subject to the “likelihood of successful elections.” Council members and human rights gurus, like China, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, are sure to welcome the instant legitimacy provided by U.S. participation. The Council–controlled by the Organization of the Islamic Conference–has adopted more condemnations of Israel than all other 191 U.N. states combined, while terminating human rights investigations on the likes of Iran, Cuba and Belarus. Obama’s move denies the opportunity to leverage the prospect of American membership to insist on reform.