Iran Becomes Member of Durban II Inner Drafting Circle

EYEontheUN reports that Iran has become a member of the "Group of Friends of the Chair", an informal group of states charged with taking the first steps towards producing a Durban II manifesto. Anne Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN says: "the travesty of Durban II as a vehicle for getting serious about combating racism is more obvious than ever, as a regime whose President is a Holocaust-denier acquires an important role in shaping the result."

Durban II - known formally as the UN Durban Review Conference - will be held next April in Geneva. It is charged with implementing the notorious 2001 Durban Declaration which found Israel guilty of racism and gave no other country even a passing mention.

The role of his "friends" is described by Armenian Chairman Zohrab Mnatsakanian as "engaging in brainstorming and consolidating inputs." Other members of the behind-the-scenes group are Azerbaijan, Pakistan and Egypt. Bayefsky adds, "one shudders to imagine the brainstorming among such human rights paragons."

The "friends of the Chair" have already met twice in July 2008 and intend to meet again shortly.

By creating this informal group, UN states have deliberately created a forum which excludes NGOs for the first time from the Durban II process.

The first contribution of the "Group of Friends" will be filed at the next stage of the process, the 'Intersessional Open-Ended Intergovernmental Working Group' session to be held in Geneva September 1-5, 2008.

"The authority figures surrounding Durban II remind us once again that this forum is an instrument serving those states bent on defeating human rights not protecting them," said Bayefsky.

Ford Foundation Still Funding Anti-Israel Groups

From Ford Foundation Still Funding Anti-Israel Groups:

Many of the anti-Israel activists at the UN anti-racism conference in Durban, South Africa, in 2001 were egged on by Ford Foundation-backed, pro-Palestinian groups. Hoping to head off a similar debacle, Ford says it will not pay for any organization to participate in the follow-up conference to Durban, slated for April in Geneva. Yet Ford today is funding several organizations that engage in the "Durban strategy" - to paint Israel as a "racist, apartheid" state and isolate the Jewish nation through boycotts, divestment and sanctions - according to a months-long JTA investigation.

A 2008-09 Ford grant for $305,000 went to the Arab NGO Network for Development, which features a map on its Web site that fails to note the existence of Israel.

Beneficiaries of Ford funds include the Al-Mezan Center for Human Rights, Muwatin: Palestinian Institute for the Study of Democracy, The Palestinian Center for Human Rights, and Miftah: The Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy.

All these groups signed onto boycott and divestment petitions against "Apartheid Israel."

UN Watch to Rights Council: Durban II Draft ‘Breaches Red Lines’

Muslims continue to dictate public policy by throwing temper tantrums about the so-called “defamation of Islam" while ignoring its own 100 year long villification of Jews and Israel. Via UN Watch:

A "non-paper" published by the planners of next year's UN conference on racism already singles out Israel and breaches Europe's red lines, UN Watch told the UN Human Rights Council this week.

The Durban Review Conference, set for next April in Geneva, will be a highly visible, amply funded, well-advertised and well-attended gathering that will focus the world’s attention on the West’s defamation of Islam and racial discrimination against its adherents, as well as on Israel’s racist persecution of Palestinians. At least that was the demand of Islamic states and their allies expressed at the Council's debate on Tuesday.

Pakistan for the Islamic group and Egypt for the African group called for addressing “new and emerging manifestations of racism” — i.e., the so-called “defamation of Islam” — in what would amount to reopening, instead of reviewing, the 2001 Durban Declaration. They demanded the UN give the conference more funding, more media exposure, more staff, and more NGO delegates. More Durban.

Pakistan further called for alterations in international human rights law to curb freedom of speech deemed offensive to Islamic sensitivities. It complained of “boycotts and the threat of disengagement” from the conference. Egypt, meanwhile, slammed the “glaring institutional weakness” of the UN bureaucrats charged with servicing the conference.

Algeria and Azerbaijan urged the conference to address the victims of “foreign occupation” — i.e., the alleged victims of Israeli racism.

For full UN summary, click here.

Click for video of UN Watch speech.

Video: How Islamic states are controlling Durban II

Durban II and the Egyptian Bully

Egypt is running circles around the states in the European Union, while the Islamic Conference now controls the African Regional Group. And nobody is prepared to stop them.

Durban Watch Alert: Israel-Bashing at Intergovernmental Working Group

Via EyeOnTheUN:

Israel-bashing agenda emerges as substantive discussion of Durban II gets underway in the first meeting of the Intergovernmental Working Group

On May 27, 2008 states negotiating the substance and procedure of the Durban Review Conference/Durban II revealed the anti-Israel agenda in the first "non-paper" outlining issues intended to be discussed.

The non-paper was released in Geneva during the first meeting of the "Intersessional open-ended intergovernmental working group to follow up the work of the Preparatory Committee for the Durban Review Conference."

Under the subject "Victims of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance", the "victims identified" by an intergovernmental working group include "the Palestinian people under foreign occupation." The paper suggests that the "vulnerability" of Palestinians "is connected to racial or ethnic distinction from the occupying power."

In other words, Palestinians are victims of Israeli racism. This is the recast UN formulation of the 1975 General Assembly resolution declaring 'Zionism is racism'.

Durban II is intended to implement the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action adopted on September 8, 2001 and that Declaration included a statement singling out Israel as guilty of racism against Palestinians.

Leading the effort to once again isolate Israel, and demonize the Jewish state as racist, are Iran and Egypt. In the section "Other contemporary forms of racism as reported by different countries" Iran pointed to "the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, which constitutes a violation of a wide range of civil and political rights." As part of "Strategies to achieve full and effective equality, including…mechanisms in combating racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance" Egypt insisted that "…Other issues to be addressed include…foreign occupation."

The Durban II agenda should ring other alarm bells for democratic societies, as the non-paper declares a clear assault on the freedom of expression under the guise of combating alleged Islamophobia. Here are some of the issues and suggestions now on the table:

"Permissible limitations on the exercise of the right to freedom of expression should be codified." "the need to draw up a code of conduct" for journalists
"define the threshold for legitimately restricting freedom of expression in order to protect the victims."
"the imbalance between the defence of secularism and respect for freedom of religion"
"the ideological pre-eminence of freedom of expression."

In the meantime, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and the African regional group - now controlled by the OIC and its spokesperson Egypt - are running circles around the European Union. On the first day of the session of the intergovernmental working group, for example, Egypt spoke more than four times as often as any other state. The German delegate remarked: "I find it quite ironic that our Egyptian colleague was insisting that he wants to be heard, when he was the person that talked most - all the time - here this morning; he has delivered a headline for this meeting which is en attendant l'Egypt [pending Egypt]."

Videos: Watching the UN mock Israel and America

Eye on the UN Presents Durban Review Conference - Durban II, #4 in a series of videos. Click here for all Durban II videos

Preparatory Committee First substantive session, Geneva, 21 April-2 May 2008

Durban II PrepCom, April 22, 2008 - The Undeniable Agenda (I) April 22, 2008:
Themes: Redefining antisemitism; gearing up for another assault on Israel and America; a step backwards for human rights, redefined by Islamic states: Click here to watch video

Durban II PrepCom, April 23, 2008 - The Undeniable Agenda (II)April 23, 2008:
Themes: Redefining antisemitism; defeating democratic rights, including freedom of expression; gearing up for another attack on "racist" Israel: Click here to watch video

EYEontheUN videos are produced by Anne Bayefsky and Lana Zizic.

South Africa Drops Bid to Host UN's "Durban II" Racism Conference, Now Expected for Spring 2009 in Europe

Planning meeting opens with Islamic-led attacks against free speech, Western democracies and a Canadian Jewish NGO. Via UN Watch.

According to diplomatic sources, South Africa has now dropped its offer, announced by President Mbeki in February, to host next year's UN sequel to the controversial 2001 Durban conference on racism, reported UN Watch, a Geneva-based human rights monitoring organization. Instead, the event is now slated for a European city in April or May 2009.

“The expected adoption of a controlled UN headquarters as the venue, be it Geneva, Paris, or Vienna, is something we fought for, as one of many necessary steps to prevent a repeat of the ugly street scenes of Durban in 2001,” said Hillel Neuer, UN Watch executive director.“Regrettably, however, events from this week’s preparatory session only underscore the fears of many that the 2009 conference will pervert the language of anti-racism for political goals, and cast a shadow upon the reputation of the UN as a whole,” he said.

Neuer pointed to several worrying developments from this week’s meeting:

• Iranian Rejection of Canadian NGO. The entire first day was devoted to an Iranian motion seeking to bar a Canadian Jewish organization from the conference, with the public encouragement of the Palestinian, Egyptian and Algerian representatives. “When a conference that purports to be against racism opens with a racially-motivated objection, it’s repulsive,” said Neuer. He credited the European Union and the office of the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights for “taking the floor to oppose the groundless singling-out of a legitimate NGO."

All of this was compounded by the statements of Algeria’s Idriss Jazairy denying that anti-Semitism is against Jews. Instead, said Jazairy on April 22, “anti-semitism targets Arabs who are also Semites, and by extension, the whole Muslim community.” Neuer said the attempt by Iran and the Arab and Islamic blocs is "also part of a larger assault at the UN Human Rights Council against the participation of civil society groups, an effort by repressive regimes to silence critical voices.”

• Anti-Western Campaign. There were renewed efforts by the Islamic bloc, in this week’s speeches and proposals, to indict Western democracies for the “defamation of Islam.” Neuer said that the fundamental flaw of the Durban II process is that, like the 2001 event, it is proving itself to be “an exercise whereby the world’s most tolerant democracies—however flawed, the ones that have made the greatest progress in enacting protection for minorities—are accused of racism and discrimination by authoritarian regimes that in their very essence embody human rights violations, by systems of oppression that persecute their minorities as a matter of course.”

Such attacks on democracy were in evidence on Tuesday when Algeria said that “freedom of expression spreads hatred and violence and leads to the burning of mosques in ‘advanced’ countries.” Similarly, Syria spoke of “crimes that are perpetrated in the name of democracy,” and described “countries that advocate democracy” as “killers [that] give a free hand to perpetrate massacres.”

Neuer said that “at root, the Durban exercise is conceived as a globally organized assault against the democratic idea, an attack upon the premise that liberal democracy is superior to systems of oppression.”

At the same time, said Neuer, “governments that perpetrate today’s worst ethnic or sectarian-based killings—Sudan’s race-based murder of 300,000 black Africans in Darfur, the tribal bloodletting in Kenya, China’s cultural oppression and shootings of Tibetan Buddhists—all these violators are already being granted effective immunity under Durban II.”

Similarly, the discussion of colonialism and slavery is focusing disproportionately on the historic sins of Western states, while omitting mention of more recent Russian colonialism in Armenia, Ukraine and other neighboring states, ongoing Chinese colonialism in Tibet, or contemporary slavery in Sudan. According to a new UN document on the budget for Durban II's planning sessions, China and Russia are the greatest contributors to the voluntary fund.

For more UN Watch quotes, comments and analysis on Durban II, click here.

Durban II Videos: A conference to redefine "antisemitism"

Durban II is the next UN "anti-racism" conference - certain to be a global platform for antisemitism and the demonization of Israel. Planning for the 2009 hatefest is already underway.

Here are two more videos from Eye On The UN. The first is of the Libyan Chairperson, Najat Al-Hajjaji, silencing criticism of efforts to redefine antisemitism at Durban II. Click here to watch video.

The next video is of the Algerian representative; watch as he (inadvertently) confirms the attempt to redefine antisemitism at Durban II. Click here to watch video.

Durban 2009 Update: European responses on NGO funding

Promoting accountability in the Arab-Israel Conflict, with thanks to NGO Monitor:

NGO Monitor has contacted the embassies of EU member states, as well as Switzerland and Norway, requesting information on their policy towards the UN Durban Review Conference scheduled for 2009. Specifically, NGO Monitor asked whether these governments had defined principles required of NGO grant-recipients regarding participation in the Durban Review Conference, and what lessons were learned from 2001.

Various governments have already made public statements expressing their concern over the Review Conference.

On January 23, 2008, the Canadian government announced that it would pull out of the conference and maintained that it will not fund NGO participation, marking a major change in comparison to the 2001 policies.

On February 15, 2008, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said “France will not allow a repetition of the excesses and abuses of 2001…I say to you: if ever our legitimate demands are not taken into account, we will disengage from the [Durban Review Conference] process."

On April 6, 2008, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Zalmay Khalilzad, said that "[W]e will not participate [in Durban Review Conference] unless it is proven that the conference will not be used as a platform for anti-Semitic behavior." He also noted that the U.S. voted against U.N. resolutions seeking to convene a Durban Review Conference in 2009 because “we [the US government does] not believe there will be a meaningful review of any of the problematic aspects of the original Durban Conference.”

As seen below, many of the preliminary responses that NGO Monitor received from European governments were vague and did not answer the questions. Follow-up requests have been sent.

Extracts from some of the preliminary responses:

Austria: “…there has not been any funding for Austrian or international NGOs at the Durban I Conference in 2001, apart from including a few representatives as part of the Austrian delegation…In the same vain, for Durban II in 2009 it is not planned to support the participation of NGOs financially.” [click here for full text of Austria's response]

Britain: "The British Government believes that it is vital to avoid the disgraceful anti-Semitism that occurred at the time of the 2001 World Conference against Racism. … We want the 2009 Durban Review Conference to contribute to the global fight against racism and anti-Semitism….we are trying to influence the outcome from a position of engagement."

For the latest NGO Monitor report on UK funding for NGOs, click here. [click here for full text of Britain's response]

Finland: “[T]he Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland has not witnessed anti-Semitic behavior by the Finnish NGO’s. In the Durban 2001 Forum, the UN Association of Finland refused to support the NGO-statement for the reason that anti-Semitism was not condemned in the statement.”

For the latest NGO Monitor report on Finnish government funding for NGOs, click here. [click here for full text of Finland's response]

Switzerland: “The goal of the Durban II conference should be an evaluation of the progress achieved since 2001 in the combat against racism as well as an examination of subsequent steps to be undertaken.”

For the latest NGO Monitor report on Swiss government funding for NGOs, click here. [click here for full text of Switzerland's response]

Sweden: “Sweden wishes to see a Review Conference that is as operational and concrete as possible, keeping a clear focus on how States have implemented the recommendations of the Durban Declaration and Plan of Action, agreed in 2001”. “…[A]ny expression or manifestation of anti-Semitism as totally unacceptable. This position will be reflected in the Government's preparations for the Review Conference at the national level.”

For the latest NGO Monitor report on Swedish government funding for NGOs, click here. [click here for full text of Sweden's response]

Government responses

The following governments had replied as of 13 April 2008 (this includes embassies which informed NGO Monitor they are awaiting responses from their Ministry of Foreign Affairs):

Czech Republic
Estonia
France
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Lithuania
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
United Kingdom

The following governments have not responded to NGO Monitor as of 13 April 2007:

Belgium
Bulgaria
Cyprus
Germany
Romania
Slovakia
Spain

Declare a Boycott of Durban II Now

Canada has declared a boycott. Israel has declared a boycott. But not the United States.

Watch the Iranian Foreign Minister, March 4, 2008, Geneva - on the UN Durban II "anti-racism" Conference
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QHe8m25xCNc&feature=PlayList&p=31F629C9FF2C34C2&index=0

Preparatory meetings for the 2009 conference begin in April 2008. There is no doubt that Durban II will provide a global platform for anti-semitism and the demonization of the state of Israel.

For more information see Durban Watch:

http://www.eyeontheun.org/view.asp?l=36

***********
Make your views knows:

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
Switchboard:
202-647-4000
http://contact-us.state.gov/cgi-bin/state.cfg/php/enduser/ask.php

President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Comments:
202-456-1111
Switchboard:
202-456-1414
comments@whitehouse.gov

Congressman Howard L. Berman
Acting Chairman, House Committee on Foreign Affairs
2170 Rayburn House Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-5021
202-225-3196

Senator Joe Biden
Chairman, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations
Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-6225
202-224-4651
OR
202-224-5042
202-224-0139
http://biden.senate.gov/contact/emailjoe.cfm

US Ambassador to the United Nations Zalmay Khalilzad
Permanent Mission of the United States to the United Nations
140 East 45th Street,
New York, NY 10017
212-415-4000
212-415-4443
usa@un.int

NGOs promote "Israeli Apartheid Week"

Islam-loving NGOs promote "Israeli Apartheid Week", where lies, fabrications, and false accusations are the order of the day. Via NGO Monitor:

War on Want, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, Keshev, I'lam and ICAHD, (whose funders include the EU, Finnish and British governments, and NIF), are joining a number of extremist NGOs to promote "Israeli Apartheid week."

Israeli Apartheid week (IAW) was first held in Canada in 2004. In 2008 it encompasses events in Canada, Mexico, South Africa, the UK, the USA and the Palestinian Territories. Its stated aim, in line with the NGO declaration from the 2001 UN World Conference against Racism in Durban, is "to create a widespread awareness of Israeli apartheid and to bolster support for the boycott, divestment, and sanctions campaign." The organizers assert the "imperative of" "isolat[ing] the Israeli apartheid regime."

Despite serious critiques of such "apartheid" rhetoric, many NGOs continue to use it as a political tool to delegitimize the existence of Israel. War on Want (WoW), which is funded by the UK and Irish governments, featured in Warwick University's program. On February 7, 2008, WoW's Senior Global Justice Campaigner, Ruth Tanner spoke on "Resistance day’: ‘Resisting the occupation: should we bother?" Berkely University, exhibited an ICAHD photographic display and Linda Ramsden, Chair of ICAHD UK is a listed speaker of the UK event. Rochama Marton, founder and President of Physicians for Human Rights-Israel (PHR-I), which receives money from the EU and Finnish Embassy among others, addressed a panel at the UK university, SOAS on February 11, 2008. On February 14, SOAS will also host a panel on "Media and Normalising Israeli Apartheid," which lists Yizhar Be’er, Executive Director of Keshev and former executive director of B’Tselem, and Haneen Zoubi, General Director of NIF and British council-funded I’lam, as speakers.

IAW's material selects and distorts facts to support its destructive political agenda, including baseless claims of "ethnic cleansing" of Palestinians, the "720 km long concrete wall", and that "[t]orture is used against virtually every Palestinian arrested." The participation of NGOs, funded by governments and the NIF, which claim to promote universal human rights, in an event which distorts these values to demonize Israel, is highly troubling.

Canada Expected to Back Out of UN Racism Conference

Moral clarity from Canada. From Canada Expected to Back Out of UN Racism Conference via Daily Alert:

Canadian Foreign Minister Maxime Bernier is expected to announce as early as Wednesday Canada is dropping out of planning for the Durban II Conference, which the UN is billing as a global follow-up to its 2001 World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa. Insiders say the government feels the new conference is shaping up to be like the anti-West and anti-Israel free-for-all that critics said the initial gathering quickly turned into. "Make no mistake, Durban II is on track to be even worse than Durban I," said Anne Bayefsky, a Canadian academic who edits the New York-based monitoring Web site EyeontheUN.org.

"Canada, if it drops out, would be exhibiting moral clarity and courage after making the mistake at Durban I of staying despite serious reservations."

NGO Durban II Update: Statement Challenges NGOs to Reject Hatred

NGO Monitor’s call on NGOs and their funders to adopt clear guidelines for the 2009 “Durban” Conference is having an impact. From NGO Monitor:

NGO Monitor’s call on NGOs and their funders to adopt clear guidelines for the 2009 “Durban” Conference is having an impact. Magenta, based in Holland, in cooperation with the Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights, published a "Statement of Core Principles for WCAR [UN World Conference against Racism] Follow up." This document expresses the need for a corrective movement to reverse the damage of the disastrous Durban I conference in 2001, and to restore the universality of human rights.

As documented by NGO Monitor, in preparing for the conference scheduled for 2009, the statement recalls that many of the participants in the NGO Forum of the 2001 Durban conference were responsible for:

"violations of procedure in the preparatory and drafting processes, … racist treatment including violence, exclusion and intimidation against Jewish participants, and the misuse of human rights terminology in the document related to the Israeli- Palestinian conflict."

Signatories to this Statement currently include Rabbis for Human Rights (RHR), which recently participated in NGO Monitor’s December 2007 Conference, devoted to the lessons of Durban, Human Rights First, and UN Watch. These and other prominent NGOs pledged to "reject hatred and incitement in all its forms, including anti-Semitism, to learn from the shortcomings of the 2001 WCAR, and to work together in a sprit of mutual respect."

This activity marks an important first step in preparing for the NGO Forum at the planned "Durban 2009 follow-on conference", and reflects the emphasis that NGO Monitor has placed on the need for strong statements and commitments by NGOs and their major funders, including the European Union, individual government aid agencies, and the Ford Foundation.

In reporting on this statement, (January 10, 2008), the Jerusalem Post quotes Rabbi Arik Ascherman of RHR: "We're not trying to protect Israel from being criticized, but as people who are really concerned with human rights and racism, and think it is important that there be a body among the community of nations dealing with these things, we don't want to see another hijacking."

Prof. Gerald Steinberg, head of NGO Monitor, noted in the Jerusalem Post article:

"There is a learning process taking place. Rabbis for Human Rights are among the first of the NGOs who were too quiet before and during 2001, to have expressed a clear position that seeks to avoid a repetition of that disaster." At NGO Monitor, "we believe there are also some people at Amnesty Israel who understand the importance [of this] and they need to make those concerns public, and we would expect that B'tselem and other groups who claim a human rights mandate
would take a leading position along with RHR."

In the coming weeks and months, NGO Monitor will be contacting officials, members, and funders of NGOs, particularly those involved in the 2001 NGO Forum at Durban, to discuss and ascertain their positions regarding participation and guidelines for the 2009 conference. The results of this research will be published as available by NGO Monitor.

Additional reports and analysis on preparations for the 2009 Durban follow-up conference, click here to see.

The farce that is International Human Rights Day

Written by Prof. Gerald M. Steinberg and Published in the Jerusalem Post, December 9th 2007

Monday, December 10 is International Human Rights Day - commemorating the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the members of the United Nations in 1948. Following the unimaginable horrors of the Holocaust, the signatories pledged to protect the "inherent dignity" and the "equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family."

But like other promises made during this period, this one was also soon violated.

In much of the world, human rights, including the basic right to life, are given short shrift. The watchdogs, both in the United Nations itself, and in the accompanying network of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that claim to promote morality and human rights, have become a major part of the problem. The words that expressed revulsion at the crimes committed against the Jewish people - "war crimes," "collective punishment," "indiscriminate mass killing," "violations of international law," and so on - have become weapons in the political war accompanying the terror campaigns against Israel.

The "reformed" United Nations Human Rights Council, which is charged with implementing the 1948 Declaration, is run by many of the worst violators of human rights. Its reports are written by "experts" who are obsessed with attacking Israel. In 2001, the UN held a conference in Durban attended by thousands of delegates, ostensibly to combat racism and xenophobia. Following a preparatory conference in Iran, led by Human Rights Commissioner Mary Robinson, this exercise became a vehicle for hatred and anti-Semitism.

Many of the NGO "superpowers" are guilty of aiding and abetting this disgraceful process. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch (HRW), the Paris-based FIDH (International Federation of Human Rights), and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) in Geneva, routinely exploit these norms to pursue their own narrow ideological agendas. They participated in the NGO Forum of the 2001 Durban Conference, which was even worse than the diplomatic session. Like the UN, the NGO reports focus obsessively on Israel, and erase the context of terrorism in order to make false and frequent accusations. In 2002, an Amnesty official was quoted on the BBC confirming the false reports of a massacre in Jenin. In 2006, HRW published hundreds of pages attacking Israeli responses to Hizbullah attacks, and glossing over Hizbullah's aggression and use of human shields.

Similarly, Israel-based NGOs such as B'tselem, Bimkom, and Gisha, which claim to support universal human rights, use double standards to falsely and systematically portray Israeli responses to terror as violations of these moral norms.

The halo effect enjoyed by the UN and NGO human rights network two or three decades ago has also been eroded by reports which make headlines, but are later shown to be fabricated or unverifiable. Essentially lacking their own research capabilities, HRW and Amnesty rely on "local eyewitnesses" for evidence. These "eyewitnesses" know that their reports, regardless of the lack of evidence or context, will be used to promote boycotts, demonization and other political campaigns. In this way, human rights have become a vehicle to promote incitement, hatred and terror - the antithesis of the objectives proclaimed in 1948.

IN ORDER to change this dismal state of affairs, and restore the moral foundation and universality of human rights, the structure of the international diplomatic and NGO mechanisms must be overhauled. Kenneth Roth, who has headed Human Rights Watch since 1993, and Irene Khan, who has controlled Amnesty International since 2001, have been in power for far too long. The donors and members of these organizations must also act responsibility to ensure that their support is not abused. Donors to NGOs are like directors of corporations who are accountable for transgressions committed by the officers of their firms.

The Ford Foundation, which was threatened with investigation by the US Congress after funding the most virulent participants in the 2001 Durban NGO Forum, adopted guidelines to prevent a repetition. Some donors to HRW and the New Israel Fund (which funds B'tselem, Machsom Watch, Gisha, Bimkom, Adalah, and others) have cut or conditioned their donations on an end to the double standards, and some members and officials of Amnesty have resigned in protest. These are all steps in the right direction.

In the Spring of 2009, the UN Human Rights Council has scheduled a follow up to the infamous Durban conference. This provides a rare opportunity for the governments that actually care about human rights, as well as the NGO community, to reverse course, and demonstrate that the lessons have been learned. If they succeed, this will mark an important step in the restoration of the values embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. But if they fail, the Declaration, and the foundation of an international moral code based on a single universal standard, may never recover.

The writer is the chair of the Political Studies department at Bar Ilan University, and Executive Director of NGO Monitor.

Durban Conference 2009: Update

The Muslim hunger lust for Jewish blood is insatiable. NGO Monitor continues to scrutinize NGO involvement in planning the Durban Conference 2009:

The NGO Forum of the 2001 UN World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance initiated a coordinated campaign of virulent anti-Israel demonization – the "Durban Strategy."

The UN’s "Durban II" 2009 forum is intended to focus on implementation of the 2001 resolution.

In November 2007, activities aimed at furthering the "Durban Strategy" and the planning of the “Durban 2009” conference continued. The NGO Committee Against Racism (part of the Conference of Non-Governmental Organizations in Consultative Relationship with the United Nations [CONGO]) held a meeting November 7, to begin planning for the scheduled meetings of the Durban II Preparatory Committee to be held in the first half of 2008.

And on November 20, 2007 the Third Committee of the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution to advance the Durban II process. According to the watchdog group, "Eye on the UN," these activities have been met with a level of opposition and criticism: "there was a clear signal [in November] that Durban II will not be allowed to claim consensus and its credibility will be challenged throughout the build up [to the planned 2009 conference]."

"Eye on the UN" cites the public condemnation of the "Durban Declaration and Programme of Action," by the United States and Israel, and the US delegate stated that his country "has well-known, principled objections to the overall direction and procedures leading up to the planned Durban Review Conference..."

To view the NGO Monitor Durban 2009 essentials page, click here.

Election of Libya and Iran Taints New UN Racism Committee

"It is an outrage that the bureau--a kind of steering committee--includes a regime such as Iran, the world's leading force in Holocaust denial. That Libya could be elected as Chair--and the West and other countries respond with deafening silence--is doubly disturbing." From UN Watch:

Libya was elected today to head a UN committee charged with organizing a series of international meetings on racism, leading up to a major world conference in 2009, while Iran was chosen to be on its 20-member governing bureau. "Choosing Libya and Iran to fight racism is like choosing Jack the Ripper to fight sexual harassment," said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch, a Geneva-based human rights monitoring organization. "Their election is a painful defeat for all who believe in the anti-discrimination agenda, and a setback for the international human rights movement as a whole. It sends the wrong message and should ring alarm bells."

The "Durban Review" process is the follow-up to the 2001 conference in South Africa that turned into a diplomatic fiasco, with the U.S. walking out.

"Moammar Khadafy's Libya is the same regime that gave its highest award in 2002 to convicted French Holocaust denier Roger Garaudy, that routinely brutalizes black African migrants, and that tortures Bulgarian and Palestinian medics for the crime of being foreigners," said Neuer. "It defies common sense and morality to put countries with dreadful records on racism in charge of a world committee to combat racism," said Neuer. "Libya’s long record of racism, intolerance and xenophobia clearly does not merit such a reward."

In 2003, when Libya ran for chair of the now-defunct UN Commission on Human Rights — represented as today by ambassador Najat al-Hajaji — 20 out of 53 members refused to support the Khadafy government, with Canada, Guatemala, and the U.S. voting against, and 17 abstaining, including all European Union members. However, said Neuer, "this time we’re seeing total silence, with countries apparently more interested in trading oil and weapons than upholding fundamental principles and the integrity of the anti-discrimination agenda."

Iran was elected to the 20-member bureau after being nominated by the Asian group. "Ahmadinejad’s Iran has been condemned by the UN for its denial of the Nazi genocide, and for oppressing its own ethnic and religious minorities," said Neuer. "How can the international community choose the most hateful government in the world to sit on an anti-racism committee?"

The governing bureau is comprised of Armenia, Estonia, Russia and Croatia, as nominated by the Eastern European group; Greece, Turkey, Norway, and Belgium from the Western group; Libya, Cameroon, Senegal and South Africa from the African group; Iran, India, Pakistan and Indonesia from Asia; and Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Cuba from Latin America.

In addition to reviewing the 2001 program adopted in Durban, the review process is expected to see Islamic states introduce new accusations against the West for "religious defamation." Similar statements have made their way into UN resolutions in recent years. A March 2007 resolution at the Human Rights Council passed over the objections of Western democracies.

For media inquiries, please telephone +41-22-734-1472 or click here.

Challenging the UN's Darker Side

The further dumbing down of the United Nations. From Challenging the UN's Darker Side:

The UN on Monday will launch a series of international meetings on racism, leading up to a major world conference in 2009. The so-called "Durban Review" process is the follow-up to the 2001 conference in South Africa that turned into a diplomatic fiasco. All indications suggest next week's session, and the events that follow from it, will mimic both the format and script of the original. The ghosts of 2001 are almost certain to be conjured up by the shamans of Durban II. The party chosen to chair the entire process through 2009 indicates its seriousness of purpose: Moammar Qaddafi's Libya.

On Thursday, while the Geneva session is underway, the European Parliament in Brussels will host a UN "International Conference of Civil Society in Support of Israeli-Palestinian Peace." The UN's 16-member Palestinian division is part of a sprawling infrastructure of anti-Israel committees and programs launched by the General Assembly in 1975 alongside its resolution declaring that "Zionism is racism." A UN secretary general cannot be judged by country-driven bodies that go astray.

But as Secretary General Ban did recently in protesting the hypocrisies of the Human Rights Council, he can choose to speak truth to power now.