|
As
I was surfing the Internet recently, trying to find a worthy
piece of news amongst the debris of the usual reports about
the economic doomsday, suicide bombings and sports
events, something caught my eye as being very odd. The report
from a credible news source was saying that South Africa has
barred the Dalai Lama, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and Tibet's
spiritual leader, from attending a PEACE conference! First I
thought it was a joke or a mistake but soon it became obvious
that the report was correct. I was still
The Dalai Lama speaking
in New Delhi, India
questioning it
though. The Dalai Lama? Really? What did he do
to offend the sensitivities of the South African government?
First they said that the Dalai Lama's presence at the conference
"would have distracted the attention from South Africa's
hosting of the world cup" but soon after the government
spokesmen provided a real reason: "Tibetan leader's presence
would not be in South Africa's best interests". You see,
the Chinese
are one of South Africa's biggest trading partners and during the
last decade they have dramatically increased their
economic presence across the entire African continent. But that presence
comes with a price tag as Chinese government warned foreign
countries not to meddle in internal Chinese affairs, and
particularly in Tibet.
Obviously the South African government took those warnings
seriously as they confirmed that their decision
not to let the Dalai Lama into the country was irreversible. As
South Africa's own Nobel Peace Prize winner F.W. de Klerck noted
that that decision "made a mockery of the whole purpose of the
peace conference". If it was any other country that succumbed to
Chinese pressure hardly anybody would have paid much
attention, but it is the unique history of South Africa in it's
struggle against apartheid that makes the decision of their
current government so shocking.
The director of the Nobel Institute, Geir Landestsd probably said it best: "It is disappointing that
South Africa, which through the long fight against apartheid has
received so much solidarity from the world doesn't want to give
that solidarity to others".
Being ungrateful is not a crime but if you claim to be a leading
democracy on the African continent you do have some moral
responsibility to at least make an appearance of some fairness.
How can you embrace a tyrant of Zimbabwe named Robert Mugabe,
openly admit that you were bought out by Chinese government and then deny a voice to
the Dalai Lama
at the peace conference, the
man who preached non violence all his life.
Eight years earlier the South African government had no problem
hosting a gathering in Durban called the U.N. World Conference
Against Racism. Then president
Thabo Mbeki even
addressed the conference with the following:
"Our common
humanity dictates that as we rose against apartheid and racism,
so must we combine to defeat the consequences of slavery,
colonialism and racism which, to this day, continue to define
the lives of billions of people who are brown and black, as
lives of hopelessness".
Obviously the Tibetans did not qualify
on the strength of another color, green, that had the government
of South Africa all shaken up.
Back in 2001 a U.N. sponsored Durban conference that was
supposed to unite the world against racism, xenophobia and
intolerance quickly deteriorated into exactly that, the
xenophobic, anti-Semitic forum that singled out Israel and tried
to brand it as an apartheid state while linking Zionism to the
form of racism. Interestingly enough it's countries with the
worst records of human rights like Iran and
then occupier of Lebanon Syria who were hell bent on pushing the
agenda.
Inside the conference there was a tug of war over the final
draft resolution. The earlier prepared text had
sentences like "emergence of movements based on racism" and
"increase of racist practices of Zionism" that prompted Israeli
and American delegations to withdraw from the conference. Then
Secretary of State, Colin Powell, denounced the
"hateful language that
singles out only one country in the world, Israel, for censure
and abuse".
While the delegates inside the hall were fighting over words and
sentences, most of the activity was taking place outside, on the
streets of Durban as
thousands of anti-Israel activists from around the world had no
problem expressing their feelings about the Jewish state. Just
to get an idea where the state of mind of people in this "peace
loving" crowd was, take a look at one of the many anti-Semitic
pamphlets handed out to the demonstrators.
At the end the U.S. and Israel walked out of the Durban
conference finding it's political climate unacceptable.
None of the offensive
sentences sought by Israel haters made it into the final resolution as most
delegates voted to reject such language. The conference that
was supposed to deal with real racism, real genocide, women's
right and other important issues was a utter failure. If there
was a lesson to be learned from the Durban gathering is how not
to organize a conference.
But oddly Durban has also created a new star attraction for many
other international conferences, the state of Israel! There is
hardly a major international gathering these days where Israel
bashers do not use the conference platform to set their
political agendas and boost their own personal
standings back home. It does not really matter if its a peace
conference, racism conference or even economic conference.
Just look at the of theatrics performed by Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan at
the Davos World Economic Forum in January of
2009. He
stormed out of a televised debate with Israeli president Shimon
Peres over Israel's war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip because he
felt that he did not get an adequate time to respond to the Israeli
president's arguments. Peres questioned
what Erdogan would do if rockets were fired at Istanbul every
night. Erdogan shot back at 84 year old Peres as he was walking
out "When it comes to killing you know very well how to kill".

Prime Minister of Turkey walks out of televised debate in Davos.
Photo
by
World Economic Forum
More then
5,000 people, many waving Palestinian and Turkish flags, greeted Erdogan back home were he was hailed as a new world leader and a
hero. His credibility on the "Muslim street" has gone through
the roof not to mention his popularity on the home front in
Turkey.
Lost in the wave of all this
adulation is Turkey's history in dealings with their
own minorities. Turkish prime-minister is yet to atone for the
genocide committed by his country against the Armenians during and after
the World
War I when over a million and a half people were massacred or deported
by the Turks. Recalling that part of history is taboo in Turkey where
denial of dirty deeds performed by their recent
ancestors has been a national policy.
Also, Mr. Erdogan has no problem sending
the Turkish air force to bomb Kurdish villages in Iraq where the suspected PKK rebel positions are located. All that in
response to the killing of the several Turkish soldiers in a
border town. It's not to difficult to imagine what he would do if
hundreds of rockets were to rain on Turkish cities.
He advocates the creation of the
Palestinian state while categorically denying the same right to
the Kurds living in Iraq because it would create instability in
Turkey where the Kurdish minority has been abused for decades.
Only recently were the Kurds allowed to use their language as it
was against the Turkish law to teach it or speak it publicly. That change did not come because
the Turkish authorities
suddenly saw the light but because it was a step toward meeting
the European Union membership requirements they are so desperately seeking. Turkish
authorities to this day try to prevent the use of Kurdish
language on radio and TV through government censorship. So
please forgive me if I do not see Mr. Erdogan as a champion of
human rights.
In March of 2009 many Arab leaders came to Doha, Qatar where the
21st Arab League summit took place. It was called the "Arab
reconciliation summit" as on the agenda was the Arab unity in
light of several regional conflicts. Egypt refused to attend
because it was angry with host Qatar for their chummy
relationship with Iran. Jordan was angry because the government of
Qatar owned Al Jazeera claimed that the late Jordanian king Hussein
was a CIA agent.
Despite the best efforts of the attending dignitaries the summit was a
disaster. The
participants could not agree on anything. The conference went
nowhere with reconciliation efforts between the feuding
Palestinian fractions of Hamas and Fattah.
It did not help the matters when during the opening session Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi grabbed the microphone and
insulted the Saudi's King Abdullah, calling him a "liar" and
a "British product and American ally"
while pronouncing himself to be
"an international leader, the dean of the Arab rulers, the king
of kings of Africa and the imam of Muslims".
Not everyone saw the Doha summit as a failure. Syrian president
Bashar Assad called it a "grand success". Well, the conference
did agree on couple of issues. For one they agreed to establish
a legal committee to seek to prosecute the Israeli leaders over
Israel's offensive in Gaza in January of 2009. They also urged
all Arab countries to reconsider its economic and political
relations with Israel.
There was another issue that Arab leaders did agree
upon. On the first day of the summit the leaders expressed total
solidarity with Sudanese leader Omar al-Bashir who was found
criminally responsible for the atrocities committed in the Darfur
region of Sudan by International Criminal Court. Mr. Bashir made
a trip to Doha despite the over-hanging warrant for his arrest
issued only a couple of weeks earlier. In Doha Mr. Bashir
received a red carpet treatment and even a kiss on the cheek
from the Qatar's emir.
Omar al-Bashir, President of Sudan
Arab leaders strongly disagreed with the ICC's decision believing
that it could lead to a civil war. I hate to drop it it on them
but the civil war in Sudan has been going on for years. It
has already claimed over 300,000 lives, most of them elderly, women
and children. Many more will die of the disease and starvation as Mr.al-Bashir kicked all
humanitarian organizations out of Darfur as a reprisal for his
conviction. At the Doha summit Mr. Bashir criticized the the U.N. security council and questioned
their credibility. He called it an "undemocratic institution"
that "targeted the weak and gave a blind eye to criminals".
Mr. Bashir's dear friend
and
the current African Union president, Libyan leader Muammar
Gaddafi, has found the real culprits when he accused the foreign forces, including Israel, of being behind the Darfur
conflict. Especially vocal in denouncing the arrest warrant
against the Sudan's president
was the above mentioned Syrian president Bashar Assad
and for a good reason. The UN backed court is currently
investigating the role of high ranking Syrian officials in the
assassination of the former Lebanese prime minister Rafik
Harriri. I think enough said about this subject.
And of course it is only
fitting that on the heels of the canceled peace conference in
South Africa, the host of the 2001 Durban conference on racism,
and the disastrous Arab summit in Doha the stage was moved to
Geneva, Switzerland where the next installment of U.N. World
Conference on Racism called Durban Review Conference or Durban
II, took place in April of
2009. The Durban II conference did not disappoint. It turned out to be as
contemptuous as the first one with Israel bashing again taking
the center stage.
You would have thought that
the organizers of the conference would have taken the lessons of the
Durban I to heart. But no such luck as the haggling over the
wording of the final draft document again preceded the actual event.
In question were sentences referring to Israel's treatment of
the Palestinians, equating Zionism to racism and so on.
Just the usual stuff that Israel haters try to push through
every opportunity they get.
Bur there were a couple of
differences from the Durban I. It turns out some parties did
learn lessons from 2001 conference as Canada, U.S., Netherlands,
Italy, Australia and Israel decided not to attend at all. They
did not again want to be part of the anti-Semitic orgy that
Durban I turned out to be. President Obama said that he would
love to participate in the conference that addressed racism and
discrimination but not with the baggage of the previous
gathering.
The U.S. negotiators tried
to resolve some sticking points prior to the conference but as
Robert Wood, the State Department spokesman said:
"Unfortunately
, it now seems certain that these remaining concerns will not be
addressed in the document to be adapted by the conference. The
document singles out one particular conflict and prejudges key
issues that can only be resolved in negotiations between the
Israelis and Palestinians" .
The Americans were also
uneasy about the efforts by the Arab states to criminalize any
criticism of Islam under the umbrella of "defamation of
religion" or "Islamofobia" in light of the Prophet Muhammad cartoons
shown in Danish newspapers. Of course the same Arab states have
no problem with Judophobia or any other phobia as long as its
does not involve Islam and Muslims.
The United Nations high
commissioner for human rights, Navi Pillay, expressed deep
disappointment by U.S. and the other boycotting countries decision
not to attend and allow the Middle East politics to intrude on
the conference for discrimination. But with all due respect to
the
high commissioner it's the U.N. and the conference organizers who created
the controversy by allowing countries like Libya, Iran, Syria
and Cuba to dominate the agenda.
If the countries that
stayed away from Durban II had any regrets about not attending
the conference I
suspect that those regrets quickly disappeared after they
listened to the headline speaker of the conference, the Iranian
president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who made sure to leave the
impression that this conference was only about Middle East and
Israel in particular.
In his rather lengthy
diatribe he started out with prasing God and all the profits
and asking Almighty to" hasten the appearance of the hidden
imam and grant him health and victory". He proceeded by accusing
the western countries in exploiting the holocaust and
transferring thousands of Jews from America, Europe and other
countries to Palestine. He accused the Security Council of
endorsing the usurper regime (Israel) and defending it for 60
years. Without referring to it by name he called Israelis the
"genocidal racists; a completely racist government and
the most
aggressive racist country" almost in succession.
As the Iranian president spoke,
the representatives of 30 European nations walked out of the
conference hall in protest while others applauded. The U.N.
Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was incensed with the walkouts and
the speech saying that he "has not experienced this kind of
destructive proceedings in the assembly by any one member
state". While his disappointment is quite understandable, as Mahmoud Ahmedinejad drove a last nail in
the Durban II coffin, what
was the U.N. thinking? That the rabid anti-Semite and a
holocaust denier will change his colors and speak of peace and
brotherhood.
|
 |
 |
|
Mahmaud
Ahmadinejad speaks at Durban II |
And
receives a hero's welcome in Iran |
The pattern of these
international conferences and summits has become pretty clear.
It's like a scripted reality show where Israel always plays the
role of the villain. Countries that seek Israel's downfall
realized a while ago that they can not defeat it militarily so other strategies are utilized to demonize the Jewish state,
isolate it from the rest of the world and legitimize ever
growing anti-Semitism.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not
a stupid man. He knows the history of anti-Semitism much better
then he lets others to believe. There is a reason he keeps calling Israel
an
illegitimate entity, denies the holocaust and scares the
world with Zionist plots. He knows that there are a lot of
willing listeners out there and reinforcing the negative Jewish
stereotypes, that have been around for hundreds of years, will
eventually make his claims a reality if he repeats them often
enough. Just ask those people who applauded him at Durban II
conference hall.
So what kind of world is it
were the most peaceful are banned from peace conferences and the
worst
oppressors are given a center stage to spew their hatred to an
audience of billions? What kind a world is it where the
conference that is supposed to fight hatred and racism actually
ends up promoting it? What kind a world is it where a man
responsible for the deaths of 300,000 people is sitting pretty
at the regional summit embraced by his fellow dictators and
complains how undemocratic the rest of the world is.
It is the strange world
indeed, where up is down, right is left, black is white and
the lie is the truth. We'd better be very careful because we can
find ourselves living in that strange universe permanently in
the not so distant future. The history of the world is full of the
terrible examples of what the hateful ambitions can lead to. The
problem is we never seem to learn from them.
|