Israel Matzav

He who is for civilization to me

When the Maccabees fought the ancient Greeks more than two thousand years ago, their battle cry was "He who is for God to me." It seems to me that a similar outcry should go out to those countries who may still oppose the hate-filled Durban III conference scheduled to take place in New York next month: "He who is for civilization to me." Anne Bayefsky points out that five countries have to decide in the very near future whether they will stand with civilization or stand with the hate mongers.

For two of those countries - Germany and Poland - Durban III is a test of whether they have really learned the lessons of World War II. For two others - England and France - the question is whether they are still free countries, or whether they have been taken over by the Islamists. And for a fifth country - Australia - the question is whether they (like Canada two years ago) will have the courage of their convictions and be willing to put their potential Security Council seat into play.

The United States, Israel, Canada, the Czech Republic, Italy, and the Netherlands have already pulled out of Durban III. But, surprisingly, many other countries, such as Germany, are still sitting on the fence. At the last round of negotiations over the wording of the final declaration, which took place in July, the German representative made a commitment: He promised that singling out individual countries or “reaffirming” the declaration or outcome of Durban I and II would be “clearly unacceptable.” Now we wait to find out if Germany has the courage of its alleged 21st century convictions. Poland should make up its decision now, too, for similar reasons. Australia, desperately seeking a seat on the Security Council, is trembling off-stage knowing that Canada was defeated at the last vote for Council seats because of its refusal to be intimidated by the powerful Islamic front at the U.N. And the United Kingdom and France have run out of excuses.

The diplomatic chicanery has left the field wide open for Durban III fans. Which explains why a “Durban + 10 Coalition” of at least 32 non-governmental organizations is busy planning events surrounding the conference in New York “to honor the 10th anniversary of the adoption of the DDPA.” Their self-described intention is to “stand opposed to the slander…against the DDPA...by the United States, Canada, Israel and several members of the European Union…to suppress the rights and demands of the many groups protected by the Durban Declaration, including…the Palestinian people.”

The 2010 General Assembly resolution authorizing Durban III says the theme of the event will be “victims of racism.” The final draft declaration demands that participating countries “proclaim together our strong determination to make the fight against racism…and the protection of the victims thereof a high priority for our countries.” And the Durban Declaration maintains that Palestinians are victims of Israeli racism.

Hence, the “Durban + 10 coalition” includes such “human rights” exemplars as the “U.S. Palestinian Community Network” and the “International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network.” The website of the former NGO declares, “Israel is an apartheid state.” The latter’s website says, “Zionism, in all its forms, must be stopped.... We pledge to: oppose Zionism and the state of Israel. Zionism is racist…Israel makes common cause with Christian fundamentalists … It continues a long history of Zionist collusion with repressive and violent regimes, from Nazi Germany to the South African Apartheid regime…” Jews become Nazis, in this twisted frame of reference.

In other words, for those states still pretending that the Durban Declaration and its progeny, including Durban III, are the right venue to commit themselves to the fight against racism, there is no wiggle room left. Are they in or out? For or against anti-Semitism?

Read it all.

Labels: anti-Semitism, Durban III

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 2:13 AM