By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, May 26 -- In the run up to September's UN meeting on the Durban Declaration, with Holocaust denial in the air, a meeting was held Wednesday on 48th Stree to scope out the session. Should the opening run from 9 am to 11:30? Or only to 10? Should it be televised? These were the questions, in the so-called “informal informal” consultations held in the UN's North Lawn building.
Monaco and Cameroon were in the chair position, and Switzerland spoke more than any other delegation. Sources tell Inner City Press that the US and Canada are nowhere to be seen in the process. But whether this will serve them come September remains to be seen.
European Union sources tell Inner City Press they are between a rock and a hard place. They would like to denounce racism, the ostensible goal of the Durban Declaration. But given how things went in Durban in 2001, and even more in 2004, they are concerned the event will provide a platform for Holocaust denial.
At the same time the EU does not want to be seen questioning free speech. Try to block media coverage -- to some, one possible solution -- or to ask in advance what participants will say, is hardly in keeping with freedom of expression.
Inner City Press covered the vote on Durban III in December 2010, when funding was approved 102 for, 33 abstaining and 17 against, including Canada and the United States.
The French Mission to the UN later told Inner City Press it had abstained because “there were many elements in the text that we couldn't support, but we support the Durban declaration and want to engage in the Durban process. Hence our vote."
The fights on May 25 were mundane: would the speakers come from regional groupings or so-called political groups like the G-77; would there be “program budget implications;” would the panel discussions be televised. The elephant in the room was who would use the spotlight, and for what purpose. We'll see -- watch this site.
