Stop Trying to Sanitize Durban! Update

by Gil Troy

Thursday, May 6, 2004

The issue is Mary Robinson's behavior at Durban, and her connection to this infamous moment in history. The issue shouldn’t be me, my integrity, my abilities as a historian, whether or not I beat my kids, or my magical abilities to call someone an anti-Semite when I did no such thing – but no one should worry, I sleep well at night and would write the exact same article again. Today’s round in the Montreal Gazette (printed below) makes it clear. Pillars of the human rights community in Montreal continue to show a surprising lack of civility and tolerance for different opinions, but Warren Allmand’s letter was at least more substantive, with more time spent addressing the issue than libeling me – and reveals my central motivation for plunging into this complicated issue. We’re arguing about the historical reputation/memory regarding Durban. Allmand’s minimizing of what happened there makes the gap clear – for many in the human rights community, they hear Durban, Mary Robinson, Human Rights, UN, and their knees go wobbly; for others of us, we hear Durban – and all associated with it – and our stomachs get queasy. What motivated me from the start was a fear that Durban was being sanitized, that as Mary Robinson collects doctorates from North American universities, her leadership at Durban is being listed on her resume as a plus -- when it was anything but, and the conference itself was not a plus.

Allmand’s challenge to me (below) “to point out one phrase in the final declaration resulting from the Durban conference that can be considered to be anti-Semitic” is doubly disingenuous. I won’t even rise to the bait and debate paragraph 63 which continues the UN tradition of singling out the Palestinians for protection or the Jewish state for blame by only naming one people as victims of racism, the Palestinians. I was very careful in my original article not to make the issue about Israelis v. Palestinians pro or con. The rankest ugliness there had to do with the blatant anti-Semitism that coursed through the streets of Durban –and this is about Jew hatred not “the occupation.” Moreover, judging the Durban conference by its final declaration is like judging the April 14, 1865 performance of "Our American Cousin" -- when Abraham Lincoln was murdered -- by its reviews. The fact that we (and I mean good people) have to view keeping relativizing the Holocaust out of a UN "human rights" document as a "victory" is not an acceptable standard for me.

And if I may add a few more "fun facts" and clarifications:

At Emory University 1000 students and faculty members signed an on-line petition opposing the granting of an Honorary Doctorate to Mary Robinson. In that debate she was called “anti-Semitic.” I set out very carefully not to call her that but to chide her for not being a part of the solution to the problem – an admittedly more ambiguous, but I believed more accurate, stance. I am appalled that her defenders have tried to shift the debate down – and I won’t spend much time repeating “Mary Robinson is not an anti-Semite” which is what they want – I will continue to emphasize Mary Robinson failed at Durban. Mary Robinson failed when in the Regional Conference in Tehran leading up to Durban she watched as the anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism festered. Mary Robinson failed when in that already inflamed atmosphere she allowed the Palestinian conflict to be singled out, acknowledging on August 9, 2001 the need for “Recognition of the accumulated sense of grievance and frustration because of prolonged military occupation, now in its fourth decade” – this behavior violated the UN protocols whereby at human rights world conferences such as at the UN Vienna World Conference on Human Rights in 1993, and the UN Beijing World Conference on Women in 1995 no single state or conflict was singled out. Mary Robinson failed because even though she herself was forced to stand up at one point and complain about the anti-Semitism in her “I am a Jew” speech, it was too little, too late -- and she nevertheless deemed the conference a success. And she continues to fail every time she refuses to distance herself from the conference – in fact boasts about it. I daresay that had we not raised this issue, as she was being toasted at McGill, her “leadership” at Durban would have been blithely listed as one of the highlights – my guess is that her hosts will now politely focus on other issues.

Should I, as some thoughtful critics suggested, have written an article detailing these faults and not talking more broadly about the anti-Semitism festering in Montreal today? Had I done that, I’m sure I would have been pilloried equally harshly for doing a hatchet job on a wonderful woman – I thought the context was essential – and an expression of my ambivalence and dislike for the issue important (although it’s been ignored). Noam Chomsky received an Honorary Doctorate a few years ago and I sat on the platform in silence with no protest; part of my argument was "not here, not now," after the UTT firebombings, after the McGill vandalism, after the Concordia riots, with the churlishness we see in Quebec, Canada, the world, on Jewish issues (let alone Israel).

Now, of course, the battle is engaged on Durban. I fear that we will soon see op-eds in the Gazette and the Globe and Mail praising Mary Robinson and Durban. We need to see experts, witnesses, and people of standing to write detailed, substantive essays detailing Mary Robinson’s failures – and the debacle of Durban, which remains a black mark on her record, and the record of the human rights community—as one black African said to me, “you’re upset because people were picking on the Jews; I’m upset because in fighting over anti-Semitism the countries of the world were able to sidestep the real issues about racism we needed to raise there.” Truth is, I’m upset about both, he should be upset about both, we should all, Jews and non-Jews, be appalled by what happened – and how that memory is being swept under the historical rug during Mary Robinson’s victory tour around North American campuses.

Gil Troy



The two latest rounds from the Montreal Gazette follow:

Troy distorts truth about Robinson Letters, May 6

Gil Troy's article regarding Mary Robinson (Insightful, May 2, "Degree of dishonour") was a disgrace.

To link Robinson with anti-Semitism, suicide bombings and racist graffiti is a total distortion of truth and very low form of political comment.

I was at the world conference against racism in 2001 and it is incorrect to state that the conference was hijacked by anti-Zionists.

I challenge Troy or anyone else to point out one phrase in the final declaration resulting from the Durban conference that can be considered to be anti-Semitic.

Yes, there were unofficial anti-Zionist marches and statements, as there were many other informal protests against several nations and governments.

But Robinson was not responsible for these. She did had responsibility for the official program and the final declaration, and these were fair and balanced.

By linking Robinson to anti-Semitism, Troy does a disservice to the cause of all those who oppose anti-Semitism and a just peace in the Middle East.

Warren Allmand Past President Rights and Democracy;

Former Liberal member of Parliament Montreal

Shame on McGill for Robinson nod

Thursday, May 06, 2004

"For evil to triumph," Edmund Burke wrote in the less egalitarian 18th century, "good men have to do nothing."

Mary Robinson did nothing to curb the vile outbreak of anti-Semitism at the Durban conference.

Shame on her, and shame on McGill University, my alma mater, for according Robinson an honorary degree. Double shame on McGill faculty members who've criticized Professor Gil Troy for exercising his right of free expression.

Norman Spector

Canadian ambassador to Israel and the Palestinian Authority, 1992-1995 BC