THE LIMITS OF ENGAGEMENT
Gerald Steinberg
Jerusalem
Post, March 1, 2009
The Obama administration’s decision not to attend the Durban Review Conference, scheduled to open in Geneva on April 21, is a very significant step toward ending the obsessive “soft-power attacks” against
and restoring the moral foundations of human rights. If Washington’s conclusion leads the Europeans to a similar move, the conference might be cancelled, or, if it is held, it will be seen as a farce, with participants limited to ,
, their Muslim allies and some marginal states.At first, the announcement that the would send Felice Gaer and Betty King to
Geneva
to negotiate the draft declaration led to fears of an unlimited commitment to engagement—red lines would become pink, and then disappear entirely. However, their harsh encounter with the reality of anti-Semitism and the singling out of in the
Durban
process resulted in the realization that the Canadian and Israeli evaluations were correct, and that non-participation was the only moral option.…
At the recent London Interparliamentary Conference on Anti-Semitism, officials from and declared that their governments were considering a pullout, but would await the results of the American delegation’s talks in
Geneva
. Over a year ago, French President Nicolas Sarkozy announced that
would not participate in an anti-Semitic conference, and if he acts on this promise, momentum will grow for full-fledged European disengagement. The Czech Republic, which holds the presidency of the European Union, would be an appropriate leader in this process and could also help restore Europe’s image in the eyes of many Israelis.For President Barack Obama and US officials dealing with human rights and international organizations, ending the racist nature of the UN’s anti-racism machinery is particularly important. To achieve this change, the abusive focus on
in the Human Rights Council needs to end, and resources need to be turned to real issues of racism and discrimination in other parts of the world.…For , a failed Review Conference would mark the defeat of the strategy adopted at the original
Durban
conference on racism, which took place in September 2001. Most of the damage there took place at the NGO Forum, in which over 4,000 officials from non-governmental organizations, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, participated.… The final declaration referred to
repeatedly as an “apartheid” and “racist” state, called for boycotts, sanctions and harassment through legal processes, known as “lawfare,” and made no mention of Palestinian mass terror attacks.… [L]eaders of the Durban Review Conference and their NGO-based allies plan to further amplify this activity, the goal being the total isolation of
. Without US or European participation, this is unlikely to happen. In a wider political framework, the ability of the Obama administration to quickly recognize the limits of engagement in this case has important implications for dealing with
’s nuclear weapons program. The Iranian government has been put on notice—American officials will not participate in infinite negotiations that do not produce results. Coupled with the restoration of ’s moral and strategic leadership, these are very positive developments for cooperation between Jerusalem and
Washington
.
Gerald Steinberg is executive director of NGO Monitor and chairs
the Political Science Department at
Bar-Ilan
University
.)
