UN Conference on Racism (Durban II) Coming Soon

Adri Nieuwhof writes in the Electronic Intifada about the preparations for the upcoming UN conference on racism, officially known as the Durban Review Conference. Remember the first one? It was either a rousing condemnation of Israel or a debacle that utterly failed to address more general issues of racial discrimination around the world. He notes:

"...[w]estern governments have repeatedly sidelined efforts to bring the case of the systematic violation of the rights the Palestinian people forward in the Durban review process. It is incomprehensible how the issue of institutional racial discrimination of Palestinians by the Israeli government cannot be a topic in the UN global process to eliminate racial discrimination."

This is important. As a supporter of Palestinian rights, I want their struggle to be raised at appropriate international forums. In the preparation for the Durban Conference, no hurdles were raised, and so that issue was raised prominently. If the metric was ‘how often the issue of Palestine can be raised' then Durban I was a huge success.

So why is the situation for Palestinians so much worse today than in 2002? The efforts to break the siege of Gaza with boats that penetrate the Israeli cordon sanitaire barely got a mention in the papers I read, despite massive efforts to make it a key event in the history of Palestinian solidarity efforts. The pro-Palestinian far left (International Answer, Troops Out Now Coalition, etc.) barely merits attention anymore, in stark contrast to 2002-3. Could it be that at Durban, the Palestinian solidarity movement over-reached, and is now suffering the consequences?

Listen to the testimony of Cherie Brown, a well known Jewish peace activist:

"It was an eye-opening week. As a United States Jew who grew up after the Holocaust, I have been insulated from many of the negative attitudes about Jews that a portion of the world's peoples still hold. It was painful to have to listen to hatred about Jews, particularly when it came from other anti-racism activists. "

Absolutely. Durban showcased the divergence of the pro-Palestinian nationalist left from the more moderate PLO and Fatah line. Where Arafat had championed a solution that both Israelis and Palestinians could live with for the long term, the shrill, strident, extremism inflected voices of Durban did everything they could to present the conflict as a zero sum game in which Palestinian justice could only come at the expense of Israel. It was a strategic gamble, and it failed. Has anyone learned their lesson?

It doesn't look that way. According to Nieuwhof , a committee representing 170 civil society institutions seems to want to accomplish at Durban II the same thing it failed to accomplish in Durban I. Namely, to promote the use of international legal instruments to isolate Israel and force it to implement the right of return, end its existence as a Jewish state.

I understand the temptation. Peace negotiations have so far been a trap for the Palestinians. Many in the global south care about this cause and would like to echo what they see as the most credible and militant voices that emerge. Like a good lawyer in a courtroom, this esteemed group carefully musters its best arguments in the most comprehensive form, and broadcasts them with the passion and intensity turned up to eleven. What else is there to do?

Here are some options to be considered, though I'm doubtful....
Find a way to build a partnership with at least some fraction of the progressive Israeli public. Not just those who would happily dismantle it's cherished institutions, but those who actually feel loyal to Israel, but want it to change. Show the world that while you have a beef with the State of Israel, there are forces representing maybe 10% of Israeli Jews you can work with. Okay, maybe 5%. If you can't come up with some kind of relationship with at least 2.5%, then maybe your rhetoric has extended beyond the reach of your capabilities.

Articulate a vision that offers a brighter future for both Israeli Jews and Palestinians. In South Africa, the ANC was careful to include whites at every level of leadership and activities. The armed wing of the ANC included numerous whites, such as the heroic Joe Slovo. The ANC's Freedom Charter is an uplifting document that speaks to all in a beautiful poetic voice:

"... South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white, and [...] no government can justly claim authority unless it is based on the will of all the people;"

Where is the Palestinian Freedom Charter, with room inside of it for the nearly six million Jews who live in Israel? We should remember that the South African liberation movement was split between those who wanted a South Africa for ALL and those who still dreamt of ‘one settler, one bullet.' The voices of those who embrace Israeli Jews as partners often come across very weakly.

Recognize that this thing you call international law is a weak and unstable hook upon which to hang your strategy. It is an arena where Palestinians have a bit more leverage than the Israelis, because they are the victims of an unequal and violent relationship. So how is that working out? Not so well, eh? A liberation movement might want to consider classic organizing strategy as an alternative. That would mean: conducting a power analysis of your opposition, locating wavering allies of your targets, and flipping them. Seek to divide your opponents, both in Israel and among Israel's allies throughout the world. Instead, the focus on a legal solution in which an imaginary outpouring of global solidarity somehow forces the Israelis to - more or less - bare their neck and apologize, has the consequence of uniting the broadest spectrum of Israelis and countries that support Israel diplomatically.

Cultivate the Palestinian spokespeople that can attract sympathy from those you seek to persuade, those that have power to grant what you want. This could mean folks like Hanan Ashrawi, who did marvelous work promoting the warm, dignified face of Palestinian nationalism. It might mean groups like Sabeel, who combine strong support for justice with a commitment to nonviolence. It might mean folks who work with Israeli solidarity activists protesting the separation barrier in Bil'in and elsewhere using mostly nonviolent methods. Train them in speaking firmly, but without hyperbole. Prepare talking points that resonate with folks who empathize with the Palestinian cause, but feel constrained to protect Israel for various reasons. Disarm your opposition, instead of granting them useful talking points.

These ideas are not new. But they seem to have a hard time rising to the top. I'm committed to amplifying those voices precisely because I'm focused on the bottom line: achieving Palestinian rights, right now, not in the distant future when international law will finally be able to help Palestinians.

As if to cement my point, let me bring a quote from Nieuwhof's post:

Martin Luther King Jr. said about the struggle against racism that "The question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be ... The nation and the world are in dire need of creative extremists."

The kind of extremism bring brought to bear is actually not creative at all. It's the same old extremism, and it doesn't appear to be working.

Useful links:

Official site of Durban I, the World Conference on Racism

Official site of Durban II, the Durban Review Conference