The UN - what was going on?

The UN has a High Commissioner for human rights, a lady by the name of Navi Pillay, and whatever her merits as an individual I think we can agree, looking round the world, that her office, at least, has not been much of a success. So what is the latest brouhaha all about?

It goes back to Durban in 2001 – perhaps earlier than that because Durban was chosen due to its history under apartheid. Anyway the UN decided to hold a conference there about racism. And a moment’s reflection will tell you that such a conference was going to be a failure from the start: I discriminate against you because you are a horrid bastard, you discriminate against me because you are a racist. But it is pointless trying to tell an international bureaucrat not to have a shindig at the world’s expense, and Durban is as good a place for a shindig as you can imagine.

Durban 2001 of course got hijacked by the noisy, who in my experience are rarely the most guilt free. The first attempt at a resolution was that there should be reparations for slavery. Colin Powell, then Secretary of State and a black man, famously asked whether he should expect to pay or to be paid. The next attempt was to try to resurrect the old UN chestnut that Zionism is racism. America, Israel and a few others walked out.

I mention all this because it was happening at the end of August 2001 and by 9th September the world had other things to think about and the fiasco had been largely forgotten.

Now Durban II has started up and you wouldn’t have needed a doctorate in international politics to guess what would happen. A few countries, including America, Canada, Italy refused to attend although Britain did (why?). The usual Zionism is racism stuff overwhelmed any attempt at serious discussion, attempting to make Israel a pariah state as South Africa was, and they added in that attacks on religions (and they mean the Danish cartoon depictions of the Prophet Mohammed) should be declared a breach of human rights. I watched Ahmadinejad’s speech on Al-Jazeerah (which is not what most people suppose it to be) and it was a shocker.

So that’s over until the next time, unless we have the sense to realise that this is not the forum for a discussion on racism, or indeed on the Israel/Palestine question. It was a clear case of the UN not resolving conflict but promoting it. The winners have been Iran and those states (well done, Italy) who boycotted. The losers have been Britain for attending and the UN itself. Ban Ki-moon, who looks next to useless, and Ms Pillay should seriously consider their positions (they won't, though).