In the shadow of the boycott

As the final preparations are underway for the UN-sponsored World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Intolerance, which is being held from August 31 to September 7 in Durban, South Africa, a number of problems facing the world organization are coming to the fore. since the end of the cold war. Not only the success of the conference itself is called into question, but there is a danger that the United Nations will further lose its already weakened authority, and that the last dreams of idealists who see the Organization as the embryo of a future world government will be shattered.

Just three days before the start of the Conference, US Secretary of State Colin Powell announced that he would not attend the meeting in Durban, and it is uncertain whether the US will decide to boycott the event entirely. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the decision to boycott depends on softening the already softened language criticizing Israel for its discriminatory and racist policies. Another painful point for the USA is the issue of compensation for the victims of colonialism and the slave system.

UNCONCEIVABLE - POSSIBLY: At the headquarters of the United Nations in Geneva, during the preparations for the Conference, the heads of state were already banging their heads over the harmonization of the agenda, which initially, at the insistence of the Arab countries, included the equating of Zionism with racism. The Bush administration immediately assessed this determination as unacceptable, and announced a boycott. After painstakingly harmonizing the text on the agenda, some progress was made as all Arab countries, except Syria, agreed that the text does not equate Zionism with racism, but insisted that the reference to "occupied territory" and "Palestine" remain, which is still reason enough for an American boycott. The USA did not have its representative at the previous UN conferences against racism, which were held in 1978 and 1983, that is, during the Cold War; they nevertheless produced some success because it was then agreed to label the apartheid regime as a crime against humanity, and an invitation was sent to the Security Council to impose sanctions on the Republic of South Africa because of apartheid. At the time, it was unimaginable that, almost twenty years later, the host of the world conference against racism would be the JAR, which in the meantime renounced the racist regime. Admittedly, no one could have guessed that the USA would boycott the conference again, and that just when the head of American diplomacy for the first time in the history of the USA is an American of African origin.

The American administration thus found itself in the gap of pressures coming from two sides. While the Jewish community in the USA approves the announcement of the boycott, the leaders of human rights organizations believe that the USA must have a high-level delegation at the Conference, as this would show the world its willingness to stand up for respect for human rights as a leading power among democratic countries. Especially today, when with the new administration in Washington, the withdrawal of the USA from various international forums is noticeable, which can have disastrous consequences for the advancement of global issues, including human rights. Against such a view, the executive director of the American Jewish community, David Harris, stated that "no member of the Jewish community will cry if the US decides to boycott."

TERET PAST: And the part that refers to compensation for the consequences of colonialism and slave ownership is somewhat mitigated, and the conference will not insist on compensation. However, African countries demanded a strong moral condemnation of the colonialism of the past more loudly than ever, even though the Secretary General of the UN, Kofi Annan, from Ghana, did not help them in the least. In order to mediate in finding a compromise between the US and the organizers, Annan called on the participants at the beginning of the month to forget the past and think about how to confront racism today. Britain, France and Belgium, for example, demanded that the text of the official conference documents emphasize that not all aspects of colonialism were disastrous. There were also difficult questions for other countries, but they still did not decide to boycott. India, for example, will have to face the condemnation of its caste system, especially the position of the "untouchable" caste, as a source of discrimination, and China the condemnation of its policy towards Tibet and the Tibetans.

With or without a US delegation, Durban will host more than 6000 members of official delegations from over 160 countries. At least 20 heads of state will be among them. Considering the high crime rate in the Republic of Yugoslavia, the rally will be secured by more than 3000 policemen, soldiers and intelligence officers. The absence of American officials does not mean that the Conference is doomed, but it is clear that even noble reasons, which the global fight against racism certainly is, are not a strong enough reason to open up some painful issues and initiate more determined international cooperation. However, since its inception, the UN has not lacked in noble ideas, but in mechanisms to turn them into reality.