Reply #10: Compare the final Durban 1 statement to the current Durban 2 draft [View All]

[Grimm]

Durban 1:

63. We are concerned about the plight of the Palestinian people under foreign occupation. We recognize the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to the establishment of an independent State and we recognize the right to security for all States in the region, including Israel, and call upon all States to support the peace process and bring it to an early conclusion;

64. We call for a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the region in which all peoples shall co-exist and enjoy equality, justice and internationally recognized human rights, and security;

65. We recognize the right of refugees to return voluntarily to their homes and properties in dignity and safety, and urge all States to facilitate such return;

151. As for the situation in the Middle East, calls for the end of violence and the swift resumption of negotiations, respect for international human rights and humanitarian law, respect for the principle of self-determination and the end of all suffering, thus allowing Israel and the Palestinians to resume the peace process, and to develop and prosper in security and freedom;

Nothing horrifically objectionable, except possibly Paragraph 65 since the right of return for Palestinian refugees was and is a heated controversial issue. It even goes to recognize Israel's right to security and doesn't explicitly single out Israel for criticism.

Durban 2:

31. Reiterates that the Palestinian people have the inalienable right to self determination and that, in order to consolidate the Israeli occupation, they have been subjected to unlawful collective punishment, torture, economic blockade, severe restriction of movement and arbitrary closure of their territories. Also notes with concern that illegal settlements continue to be built in the occupied Arab territories since 1967;

32. Expresses deep concern at the plight of Palestinian refugees and other inhabitants of the Arab occupied territories as well as displaced persons who were forced to leave their homes because of war and racial policies of the occupying power and who are prevented from returning to their homes and properties because of a racially-based law of return. It recognizes the right of return of Palestinian refugees as established by the General Assembly in its resolutions, particularly resolution 194 of 11 December 1948, and calls for the return to their homeland in accordance with and in implementation of this right;

33. Reiterates deep concern about the plight of the Palestinian people as well as inhabitants of the other occupied territories under foreign occupation, including the obstruction of the return of refugees and displaced persons, and the construction of the segregation wall, and urges respect for international human rights law, international refugee law and international humanitarian law, and calls for a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the region;

34. Re-emphasizes the responsibility of the international community to provide international protection, in particular from racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, for Palestinian civilian populations under occupation in conformity with international human rights law and international humanitarian law;

Proposal to include reference to Gaza situation – language to be provided

No more mention of Israel's right to security. No mention of need to get back to the peace process (instead using a more generic and even less defined "call for peace"). Use of loaded words like "segregation wall". Deems Israel's right of return law to be racist. Personally, I'm also bothered that they've decided to characterize the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a racially based conflict rather than one based on both sides' needs for prosperity, security and access to resources.

And just to point out this draft was from January 28th. That was well before Obama's team joined in and when they did join they said the draft has gotten even worse. I'm kind of afraid to see what the current version looks like after the most recent round. There are a worrying number of references towards limits on what the media can say, multiple attempts to limit discrimination based on sexual orientation and according to some sources they're "haggling" over whether to mention the Holocaust this draft (basically if the Holocaust is mentioned, Israel should be singled out for criticism).

Also, as a sidenote, the US does have a reason to consider leaving even if Jews and Israel aren't mentioned. One of the other big themes of the WCAR is compensation for victims of racism. Basically, the proposal is getting to the point of saying that the US has to pay out to numerous countries because of their role in the trans-Atlantic slave trade. While that's not necessarily objectionable to most here, I doubt Obama is willing to risk thee support of the American public by and large by agreeing to pay large sums of money to a number of countries for events that occurred centuries ago, particularly during these tough economic times. But maybe I'm just a cynic.

Oh, and lastly there's a fight over whether the final WCAR proposal should be made international law or not. The EU (and I imagine the US, Canada and Israel) want the 1965 Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to remain the law, but other countries are pushing for this to be the new norm.