[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 15]
[House]
[Pages 20260-20265]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




SENSE OF HOUSE REGARDING CAMPAIGN BY ORGANIZATION OF ISLAMIC CONFERENCE 
               TO DIVERT UNITED DURBAN REVIEW CONFERENCE

  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to 
the resolution (H. Res. 1361) expressing the sense of the House of 
Representatives that the United States should lead a high-level 
diplomatic effort to defeat the campaign by some members of the 
Organization of the Islamic Conference to divert the United Nation's 
Durban Review Conference from a review of problems in their own and 
other countries by attacking Israel, promoting anti-Semitism, and 
undermining the Universal Charter of Human Rights and to ensure that 
the Durban Review Conference serves as a forum to review commitments to 
combat all forms of racism, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
  The text of the resolution is as follows:

                              H. Res. 1361

       Whereas the United Nations is undertaking preparations for 
     a 2009 Durban Review Conference on the implementation of 
     commitments made as part of the 2001 World Conference Against 
     Racism held in Durban, South Africa;
       Whereas the 2001 World Conference Against Racism marked an 
     important recognition of the historic wounds caused by 
     slavery, colonialism, and related ongoing racism and racial 
     discrimination, including the recognition of the 
     transatlantic slave trade as a crime against humanity, and 
     that people of African descent, people of Asian descent, and 
     indigenous peoples who were victims of these acts continue to 
     face discrimination and marginalization as a direct 
     consequence;
       Whereas the 2001 World Conference Against Racism also 
     undertook historic efforts to recognize and address ongoing 
     racism and racial discrimination against persons of African 
     descent and members of Jewish, Muslim, caste, indigenous, 
     Roma and Sinti, and other communities, as well as anti-
     migrant xenophobia and incitement to racial and religious 
     hatred;
       Whereas the 2001 World Conference Against Racism and its 
     achievements were overshadowed and diminished as some 
     participants in the conference, in particular during the Non-
     Governmental Organization Forum, called the ``NGO Forum 
     Against Racism'' (NGO Forum), misused human rights language 
     to promote hate, anti-Semitism, incitement, and divert the 
     focus of the conference from problems within their own 
     countries to a focus on Israel;
       Whereas the NGO Forum produced a document called the ``NGO 
     Declaration'' that contained abusive language, branding 
     Israel an ``apartheid state'' that is guilty of ``racist 
     crimes against humanity'';
       Whereas the United States withdrew its delegation from the 
     2001 World Conference Against Racism, a decision that 
     Secretary of State Colin Powell explained by stating that 
     ``you do not combat racism by conferences that produce 
     declarations containing hateful language, some of which is a 
     throwback to the days of `Zionism equals racism'; or supports 
     the idea that we have made too much of the Holocaust; or 
     suggests that apartheid exists in Israel; or that singles out 
     only one country in the world--Israel--for censure and 
     abuse'';
       Whereas the atmosphere of anti-Semitism at the NGO Forum 
     was described as ``hateful, even racist'' by former High 
     Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson and as 
     ``disgraceful'' by Deputy Foreign Minister Aziz Pahad, of 
     South Africa, who also stated that parts of the 2001 World 
     Conference Against Racism were ``hijacked and used by some 
     with an anti-Israeli agenda to turn it into an anti-Semitic 
     event'';
       Whereas the United Nations High Commissioner for Human 
     Rights, who served as Secretary General of the 2001 World 
     Conference Against Racism, refused to accept the NGO 
     Declaration, and some leading civil and human rights 
     organizations and activists criticized the repugnant anti-
     Semitism and demonization of Israel in the NGO Forum, and the 
     harassment of Jewish participants it engendered;
       Whereas despite recognizing the Holocaust and increased 
     anti-Semitism, the official government declaration adopted by 
     the 2001 World Conference Against Racism, the ``Durban 
     Declaration and Program of Action'', highlighted the ``plight 
     of the Palestinian people under foreign occupation'', and in 
     so doing singled out one regional conflict for discussion in 
     a biased way, and wrongly implied that Israeli Government 
     policies towards the Palestinians are motivated by racism;
       Whereas the Human Rights Council agreed in Resolution 3/2 
     on December 8, 2006, that the 2009 Durban Review Conference 
     would, like other United Nations review conferences, focus on 
     countries' implementation of the many commitments to fight 
     racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related 
     intolerance contained in the official government Durban 
     Declaration and Program of Action and that there will be ``no 
     renegotiation of the existing agreements contained therein'';
       Whereas at the first organizing session of the Durban 
     Review Conference on August 27, 2007, in Geneva, Switzerland, 
     Ambassador Masood Khan of Pakistan, speaking ``on behalf of 
     the OIC'', described the concerns being expressed about the 
     Durban Review Conference as a ``smear campaign'', and made it 
     clear that the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) 
     intends to make so-called ``contemporary'' forms of racism a 
     centerpiece of the conference agenda, urging also that 
     ``[t]he Conference should move the spotlight on the continued 
     plight of Palestinian people and non-recognition of their 
     inalienable right to self-determination'';
       Whereas several OIC member states have also made clear 
     their determination to go beyond the comprehensive list of 
     items covered by the Durban Declaration and Program of Action 
     to force consideration by the Durban Review Conference of a 
     global blasphemy code that would legitimize arbitrary 
     restrictions of freedom of thought, conscience and religion, 
     and the freedoms of expression and opinion, all in the name 
     of protecting religions from ``defamation'' and 
     ``blasphemy'';
       Whereas following the August 27, 2007, preparatory meeting 
     for the Durban Review Conference in Geneva, Switzerland, 
     several countries, including the United States, France, and 
     Israel, stated that the Conference would not be worthwhile or 
     worthy

[[Page 20261]]

     of support if it were not limited to a discussion of country 
     commitments to combat racism, racial discrimination, 
     xenophobia, and related intolerance contained in the Durban 
     Declaration and Plan of Action;
       Whereas the High Commissioner for Human Rights was named 
     Secretary-General of the 2009 Durban Review Conference;
       Whereas in advance of determining the modalities, format, 
     duration, and venue of the 2009 Durban Review Conference, the 
     OIC and G-77 member states requested the United Nations 
     General Assembly to fund a $7.2 million preparatory process 
     of international, regional, and national meetings;
       Whereas on November 28, 2007, 45 United Nations Member 
     States, including the United States, joined together in the 
     Third Committee (Resolution A/C/3/62/L.65/Rev.) to vote 
     against a resolution that contradicted the 2009 Durban Review 
     Conference preparatory committee consensus agreements about 
     the framework of the Durban Review Conference, its scope, and 
     sources of funding;
       Whereas on December 21, 2007, 40 United Nations Member 
     States, including the United States, joined together in the 
     Fifth Committee (Resolution A/C.5/62/21) to vote against a 
     resolution that authorized up to $6.8 million to fund the 
     2009 Durban Review Conference preparatory process;
       Whereas the United States has decided to withhold from its 
     2008 funding for the United Nations an amount equivalent to 
     the United States share of the United Nations Human Rights 
     Council-administered preparatory process for the 2009 Durban 
     Review Conference; and
       Whereas since the 2001 World Conference Against Racism, the 
     need for a credible global forum to review United Nations 
     Member States' efforts to combat racism remains urgent given 
     the continuing scourge of racism, discrimination and related 
     violence, including against persons of African descent, 
     Jewish, Muslim, caste, indigenous, Roma and Sinti, and other 
     communities, anti-migrant xenophobia, and incitement to 
     racial and religious hatred: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
       (1) acknowledges that the 2001 World Conference Against 
     Racism marked an important recognition of the historic wounds 
     caused by slavery, colonialism, and related ongoing racism 
     and racial discrimination, including the recognition of the 
     transatlantic slave trade as a crime against humanity, and 
     that people of African descent, people of Asian descent, and 
     indigenous peoples who were victims of these acts continue to 
     face discrimination and marginalization as a direct 
     consequence;
       (2) reaffirms its abiding commitment to the cause of 
     combating continuing racism, racial discrimination, 
     xenophobia, and related intolerance in all its forms;
       (3) calls on the President and the Secretary of State to 
     lead a high-level diplomatic effort to ensure that the Durban 
     Review Conference focuses on the implementation by states of 
     their commitments to combat racism, racial discrimination, 
     xenophobia and related intolerance and to defeat any effort 
     by states to use the forum to promote anti-Semitism or hatred 
     against members of any group or to call into question the 
     legitimacy of any state;
       (4) calls on the President to urge other heads of state to 
     condition participation in the 2009 Durban Review Conference 
     on concrete action by the United Nations and United Nations 
     Member States to ensure that it is not a forum to demonize 
     any group, or incite anti-Semitism, hatred, or violence 
     against members of any group or to call into question the 
     existence of any state;
       (5) calls on the Secretary of State to--
       (A) initiate United States policy into action by calling on 
     counterparts, including the Government of Pakistan as the 
     chair of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and 
     the Government of Egypt as the head of the African Group, to 
     insist that they take prompt and effective measures to ensure 
     that the Durban Review Conference does not become a forum for 
     anti-Semitism, incitement or hatred against members of any 
     group or to call into question the existence of any state; 
     and
       (B) demarche foreign capitals raising the concerns of 
     Congress and to report to Congress on what steps the United 
     States and its allies have taken to address these concerns;
       (6) commends all governments, including those of the United 
     States, France, Canada, Israel, the United Kingdom, and the 
     Netherlands that have declared their intentions not to 
     participate in any United Nations Durban Review Conference 
     that sidesteps scrutiny of country commitments to combat 
     racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia, and related 
     intolerance, and that promotes hate, undermines human rights 
     standards, and damages the credibility of the United Nations 
     itself;
       (7) commends the countries that joined the United States, 
     including the member states of the European Union, Albania, 
     Andorra, Australia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Croatia, Georgia, 
     Israel, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, San Marino, Serbia, the 
     former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Ukraine, Canada, and 
     the Republic of Korea, in voting to uphold earlier United 
     Nations consensus agreements that established the scope and 
     funding of the 2009 Durban Review Conference process;
       (8) urges all United Nations Member States not to support a 
     2009 Durban Review Conference process that fails to adhere to 
     established human rights standards and to reject an agenda 
     that incites hatred against any group in the guise of 
     criticism of a particular government or that seeks to forge a 
     global blasphemy code;
       (9) commends the diverse civil society organizations that 
     have joined together to learn from the shortcomings of the 
     2001 World Conference Against Racism, and to work together in 
     a spirit of solidarity and mutual respect toward a 2009 
     Durban Review Conference that rejects hatred in all its 
     forms;
       (10) reaffirms that, as recognized by Article 18 of the 
     Universal Declaration of Human Rights, ``Everyone has the 
     right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this 
     right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and 
     freedom, either alone or in community with others and in 
     public or private, [and] to manifest his religion or belief 
     in teaching, practice, worship and observance'';
       (11) urges all states to implement their commitments to 
     combat racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related 
     intolerance to secure just treatment and the realization of 
     universal human rights for all as enshrined in international 
     human rights instruments, in particular the Universal 
     Declaration of Human Rights, the International Convention on 
     the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, and the 
     International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;
       (12) notes that the Human Rights Council agreed in 
     Resolution 3/2 on December 8, 2006, that the 2009 Durban 
     Review Conference would, like other United Nations review 
     conferences, focus on countries' implementation of the many 
     commitments to fight racism, racial discrimination, 
     xenophobia and related intolerance contained in the official 
     government Durban Declaration and Program of Action and that 
     there will be ``no renegotiation of the existing agreements 
     contained therein'';
       (13) recognizes the purposeful attempts of some countries 
     to prevent a focus on ongoing racism by utilizing 
     inflammatory language, employing divisive tactics and 
     strategies, fostering an atmosphere of anti-Semitism and 
     otherwise deviating from the commitments made at the 2001 
     World Conference Against Racism in order to divert the 2009 
     Durban Review Conference from the important goal of 
     eradicating global racism;
       (14) calls on United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon 
     to publicly urge the Human Rights Council to adhere to its 
     mandate and to the high responsibility and expectations 
     placed on it, and asks him to personally intervene to refocus 
     the 2009 Durban Review Conference efforts on the review of 
     what United Nations Member States have done to fulfill their 
     commitments to combat racism, racial discrimination, 
     xenophobia and related intolerance, and on concrete action to 
     fight racism, anti-Semitism, and all forms of hatred, 
     intolerance, and violence; and
       (15) calls on the High Commissioner for Human Rights to 
     urge United Nations Member States to adhere to the agreed 
     framework of the 2009 Durban Review Conference and its 
     previously agreed upon goals and parameters and to urge 
     Member States of the preparatory committee to return to 
     decision making by consensus.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Berman) and the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-
Lehtinen) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.


                             General Leave

  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this 
resolution, and I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
  First, I want to express my appreciation to the ranking member of our 
Foreign Affairs Committee, Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, along with the 
distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Africa and Global Health, 
Mr. Payne, and my colleague from California, Ms. Barbara Lee, for their 
hard work on this resolution aimed at preventing a repeat of the tragic 
outcome of the 2001 World Conference Against Racism.
  As my colleagues know, the convening of the first World Conference 
Against Racism in Durban, South Africa, in 2001 marked an important 
recognition of the historic wounds caused by slavery, colonialism, and 
ongoing racism and racial discrimination.

[[Page 20262]]

  The Durban conference's explicit recognition of the transatlantic 
slave trade as ``a crime against humanity'' was a watershed event in 
the global community's effort to begin confronting this indelible stain 
in human history.
  Tragically, the seminal achievements of this conference were 
overshadowed and diminished when some conference participants diverted 
the focus of the conference from problems in their own countries to a 
pathological focus on Israel and Jews.
  The worse abuses took place in and around the NGO forum that took 
place on the margins of the conference. This forum devolved into a 
hate-filled circus, as anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic rallies spilled 
onto Durban's streets.
  The official document produced by the NGO forum contained abusive 
language branding Israel an ``apartheid state'' that is guilty of 
``racist crimes against humanity.''
  The government document, while not as inflammatory as the NGO 
document, singled out one and only one regional conflict in a biased 
way by highlighting the ``plight of the Palestinian people under 
foreign occupation,'' and in so doing, wrongly branded Israel's 
treatment of Palestinians as racist.
  The U.N. is now preparing a Durban Review Conference set to take 
place in Geneva in 2009. Despite the fact that the U.N. Human Rights 
Council agreed in Resolution 3/2 on December 8, 2006, that the review 
conference would be limited in its scope to a focus on countries' 
implementation of commitments to fight racism and discrimination, the 
same actors that hijacked the initial Durban conference are threatening 
to do so once again.
  In preparatory meetings for the Durban Review Conference in Geneva, 
the Organization of the Islamic Conference, led by Pakistan, and the 
African Group, led by Egypt, have boldly stated--and that's the 
governments of both Pakistan and Egypt here--have boldly stated their 
determination to go beyond the boundaries established for the Durban 
Review Conference to attack Israel and to make so-called new forms of 
racism a centerpiece of the review conference agenda.
  Our government and the governments of France, Canada, the United 
Kingdom, The Netherlands, and Israel have stated that unless the 
direction of the conference is refocused, the review process will not 
be credible or worthy of support.
  I strongly support these ``redlines'' and will urge the next 
administration not to participate in the Durban review process if it 
continues on its current path.
  But up to this point, neither the State Department nor the White 
House has undertaken any kind of sustained diplomatic effort to ensure 
that this outcome is not a forgone conclusion.
  Our resolution confronts the diplomatic inaction by calling on the 
Secretary of State to convey in the strongest possible terms to the 
governments of Pakistan and Egypt that their campaign to hijack Durban 
II is completely unacceptable to us.
  It also calls on the State Department to undertake a worldwide 
demarche of foreign capitals to seek support for refocusing the 
conference on its agreed-upon purpose.
  A focused high-level diplomatic effort on the part of the State 
Department and the White House could force the OIC and the Arab League 
to stand down in their campaign to usurp the Durban review and to 
further unravel global adherence to human rights norms.
  Unlike in the run-up to the original Durban Conference in 2001, many 
key U.S. allies have spoken out forcefully and resolutely in opposition 
to the campaign to hijack Durban II.
  President Sarkozy of France, for example, has stated that the 
Government of France will not tolerate ``a repeat of the digression and 
extremes of 2001.''
  It is time for the administration to end any diplomatic retreat from 
U.N. human rights mechanisms. We have ceded far too much space to human 
rights abusers by sitting on the sidelines in Geneva. We must confront 
the fact that among the key spoilers of U.N. human rights bodies are 
governments we should be in a position to influence, such as Pakistan 
and Egypt.
  The United States is in a position to lead. We need the will to do 
so.
  Our European allies feel far more threatened than they have been in 
the past by the intense OIC campaign to unravel key global human rights 
standards such as the right to freedom of expression.

                              {time}  1730

  They would certainly respond to the re-emergence of the United States 
as the leading advocate for universal standards of human rights.
  The need for a credible global forum to review United Nations member 
states' efforts to combat racism remains urgent. The scourge of racism 
and related intolerance has not abated. If anything, discrimination 
against people of African, Jewish and Muslim descent has increased. We 
have also seen recently alarming outbreaks of violence against refugees 
and migrants. It makes no sense, therefore, to cede this critical forum 
provided by the Durban Review to a group of countries who are hostile 
to democratic principles and human rights standards.
  Madam Speaker, I strongly support the resolution.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 1361--but, 
but, but, but, but with great reservations, particularly with respect 
to changes made to the text after the resolution had been adopted by 
our Foreign Affairs Committee.
  Madam Speaker, in 2001, a number of anti-democratic governments 
hijacked the planning and implementation of the World Conference 
Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related 
Intolerance in Durban, South Africa.
  Instead of representing a bold step forward by devoting its attention 
to fighting racism and other bigotry, the event was dominated by 
attacks on America, on Israel, and on Jews at every turn.
  At the conference's NGO forum, groups distributed literature 
expressing sorrow that Adolf Hitler did not fully exterminate the 
Jewish people. The anti-Israel and anti-American rhetoric at Durban so 
discredited the conference that our U.S. Secretary of State, Colin 
Powell, withdrew our delegation, stating, ``I know that you do not 
combat racism by conferences that produce declarations containing 
hateful language or that singles out any one country alone in the 
world, Israel, for censure and abuse.''
  Our late friend and colleague, Tom Lantos, the former Chair of the 
Foreign Affairs Committee, also walked out on Durban, stating that the 
conference ``provided the world with a glimpse into the abyss of 
international hate, discrimination and, indeed, racism.''
  Today, Madam Speaker, we are confronted with the forthcoming 2009 
Durban Review Conference, also known as Durban II. The version of this 
resolution that passed our committee was a compromise that was worked 
out between our Republican and Democratic Members. Having introduced 
several resolutions in this Congress addressing Durban II, I felt at 
the time that even that compromise text did not go far enough in 
portraying the problems plaguing this conference. That compromise text, 
however, focused on defeating the campaigns by some countries, 
particularly members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, to 
divert Durban II away from reviewing human rights concerns and, 
instead, focus it on attacking Israel and promoting anti-Semitism.
  Unfortunately, Madam Speaker, the text before us today has a 
different focus. This text places the emphasis on higher level U.S. 
diplomatic efforts on ensuring that Durban II follows up on the 
commitments made at the last conference, an effort that could be 
interpreted as legitimizing the first Durban meeting, and as such the 
efforts by Israel and America haters.
  Indeed, Madam Speaker, responsible nations must work to fight against 
racism and other forms of intolerance.

[[Page 20263]]

And therefore, we appreciate that the 2001 Durban Declaration declared 
slavery to be a crime against humanity and noted that the Holocaust 
should never be forgotten.
  We all wish that Durban I were a symbol of success in the struggle 
against racism, and that Durban II would build on that success. 
However, Madam Speaker, the Durban Conference ultimately did not 
represent progress against racism. Until this very day, Durban is a 
symbol of the powerful, pervasive menace of anti-Semitism and anti-
Israel hate.
  Indeed, the conference's own Durban Declaration, which could have 
been a stirring, unequivocal call to stop racism and hate, was 
tarnished by a number of irrelevant provisions, including several 
clauses that singled out Israel while ignoring the plight of Israelis 
under siege from violent extremists.
  Therefore, it is imperative that we not imply, in hindsight, that 
Durban I was more positive than it actually was; neither should we 
pretend that Durban II will be less disastrous than it actually will 
be.
  The planning committee for Durban II, Madam Speaker, is led by the 
regimes of Libya, Iran and Cuba. And that committee has already 
expressed its intent to focus the conference on Israel bashing, anti-
Semitism, and establishing a global blasphemy code that could stifle 
our freedom of speech and religion.
  Just a few days ago, on September 19, the Algerian Ambassador to the 
U.N. Missions in Geneva, within the context of discussions concerning 
Durban II, redefined anti-Semitism and referred to ``traditional anti-
Semitism'' as having become ``politically incorrect in many rich 
nations.'' What? Translation, Madam Speaker: Anti-Israel and anti-
Semitism is objectionable in rich nations of the West, but acceptable 
everywhere else.
  The fix is in, Madam Speaker. After extensive diplomatic efforts by 
the U.S. to prevent Durban II from following in the dark path of its 
predecessor, we joined our allies, Canada and Israel, in declaring that 
we will not fund and we will not participate in a conference that 
promotes hate.
  As former Assistant Secretary of State Kristen Silverberg noted while 
testifying before our Foreign Affairs Subcommittee this past April, 
``There is absolutely no case to be made for participating in something 
that is going to be a repeat of Durban I. We don't have any confidence 
that this will be any better than Durban I.''
  It is clear, Madam Speaker, that any further U.S. involvement in 
Durban II in the planning process, whether by an Undersecretary, by the 
Secretary of State, or even by the President, will not avert the 
looming train wreck that is Durban II. It will only waste precious U.S. 
time, legitimacy, and political capital on a doomed venture.
  However, the text before us today, while it contains some positive 
clauses as it has been amended after committee action, could be 
misconstrued as urging America to further participate in the Durban II 
planning process in order to attempt to ensure that Durban II follows 
up on the commitments made at Durban I.
  Making sure that we don't send a mixed signal is especially important 
this week, Madam Speaker, as the United Nations General Assembly meets 
in New York and as Ahmadinejad prepares today to spew his anti-
American, anti-Israel, anti-Semitic venom on the world stage.
  I will vote for this resolution, Madam Speaker, with the intent that 
it does not call for the U.S. to participate in Durban II or its 
planning process in any way, shape or form. Moreover, Madam Speaker, I 
will continue my efforts to work with my colleagues, the executive 
branch, and our allies to discuss an alternative to Durban, one rooted 
in freedom, in tolerance, and in democratic values.
  I thank Chairman Howard Berman for introducing this resolution. I 
intend to vote for it with all of these reservations.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, before I yield to my colleague from 
California, I would like to yield myself 1 minute.
  The gentlelady and I, my ranking member, we're coming from the same 
place in the sense that we do not want the United States participating 
in a conference which produces the kind of statements and the kinds of 
activities that happened the last time. Perhaps in this case I'm a 
little more of an optimist than the gentlelady from Florida because I 
can't think of anything better, that, before the last preparatory 
meeting, the House speaks on what our red lines are--yes, we want the 
conference to succeed, it's an incredibly important purpose, as the 
gentlelady has agreed to and acknowledged and has always been 
supportive of. But we know what's happened before, we know what's being 
set up to happen this time. But I want to see delegations from the 
kinds of organizations that are supporting this resolution that plan to 
go to Geneva for that preparatory meeting to say, in the United States, 
we speak with one voice, and that includes not simply the American 
Jewish Committee and APAC and the other Jewish community organizations 
that support this resolution----
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. BERMAN. I yield myself 1 additional minute.
  But it also includes the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Human 
Rights First--one of the preeminent human rights organizations--the 
NAACP, and all the other organizations that are going to Geneva, 
supporting this resolution and telling them that we're not going to 
stand for another hijacking. And this resolution creates the framework, 
with the support of those kinds of organizations, to make that last 
effort. While I can't tell you what's going to happen there, let's give 
it our best shot.
  Passing this resolution, allowing these organizations to go with a 
statement from the House of Representatives that is clear on the red 
lines, is very important.
  I now yield 4 minutes to my friend and colleague, who has been very 
involved in this process from the very beginning and has helped us to 
fashion the final product with a tremendous contribution, the 
gentlelady from California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE. I want to thank the gentleman for yielding and for your 
patience and for your understanding and for your really very skillful 
way in bringing us all together to make sure that there is a resolution 
that we all can support.
  I do support H. Res. 1361, putting the House, first of all, on record 
in support of the United States leading a high-level diplomatic effort 
to ensure that the Durban Review Conference, better known as Durban II, 
serves as a forum to review commitments to combat all forms of racism.
  The resolution also directs the United States to strongly oppose any 
effort by any party to use the forum as a platform for attacking 
Israel, for promoting anti-Semitism, or undermining the Universal 
Declaration of Human Rights.
  Madam Speaker, in 2006, the United Nations General Assembly voted to 
hold a conference to review the process and progress made by member 
nations in implementing the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. 
This declaration was the signal achievement of the World Conference 
Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related 
Intolerance, which was held August 31 through September 7, 2001 in 
Durban, South Africa. The conference known as the ``Durban Conference'' 
was attended by more than 10,000 persons from all corners of the globe. 
The Review Conference, or Durban II, is scheduled to convene in Geneva, 
Switzerland, in April 2009.
  This resolution is an important resolution warranting the support of 
all Members. But it's also important for my colleagues to know that, 
once again, without the leadership of Chairman Berman and Chairman 
Payne and Ranking Member Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, we really wouldn't have 
this opportunity to put the House on record directing the United States 
to exercise the strong leadership that we've all talked about at the 
Durban II Conference, and to resist any attempt by

[[Page 20264]]

any party to launch anti-Semitic attacks on Israel.
  So let me just say it has been a privilege working with all of you 
over these past several months in crafting this language that reflects 
our shared commitment to combating racism in all forms and condemning 
anti-Semitism.
  I want to say also that I was part of the Durban Conference. 
Actually, we wrote a letter to the Secretary of State, then Secretary 
Colin Powell, under the leadership of our Congressional Black Caucus 
Chair then, Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson. And we told the 
Secretary of State and the State Department then that in no way did we 
believe Durban I should turn into a forum to attack Israel or become an 
anti-Semitic forum, and that, in fact, we believe this Durban 
Conference was so important to African Americans and to all minorities 
in America that we thought then that it was even important on Durban I 
to try to stop all of the things that the NGO forum allowed to happen.

                              {time}  1745

  But I want to clarify that that was the forum; that was not the full 
Durban conference. We were there. The United States did not send an 
official delegation. And in fact there was some delegates there who 
actually left the conference. But Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson, 
myself and others, we said we would end up just being the official 
delegation. I think there were seven or eight of us at Durban because 
we felt it was so important to first stay there to make sure that we 
could try to ensure that it was focused on combating racism.
  And, secondly, there were hundreds and hundreds of African Americans 
at that conference. This is one of the first conferences where African 
Americans could go abroad and talk about all forms of racism; what had 
happened, what the trans-Atlantic slave trade really was all about, its 
legacies and its vestiges. So this is an important conference.
  Let me just mention what this resolution is and summarize some of the 
provisions of this resolution. First, to review the progress and assess 
implementation of the declaration by all stakeholders.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman from California 
has expired.
  Mr. BERMAN. I yield the gentlelady an additional 2 minutes.
  Ms. LEE. To review the progress and assess the implementation of the 
Durban Declaration, to assess the effectiveness of the existing Durban 
follow-up mechanisms and other relevant United Nations mechanisms 
dealing with racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related 
intolerance, to promote the universal ratification and implementation 
of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of 
Racial Discrimination, and to identify and share good practices in the 
fight against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related 
intolerance.
  We should support this resolution because it says very explicitly 
that we will not allow, impugn and support behavior at any of these 
conferences, including we condemn what happened at the 2001 NGO forum 
as it relates to anti-Semitism and attacks on Israel. And this is 
important because it really does encourage this active participation by 
the United States in this conference, because I can guarantee you, just 
as the seven or eight of us members of the Black Caucus who went to 
Durban the first time tried to beat back any type of anti-Semitism we 
saw bubbling, we will do that this time. And we want an official, high-
level delegation along with us to go to Durban so that we can do the 
business and move forward to participate in a world forum to combat 
racism and discrimination.
  I'm proud of the fact that the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights 
supports this. Mr. Berman laid out who all is involved in that 
conference. It's a good resolution. It's a resolution that deserves our 
support on both sides of the aisle.
  Thank you, again, Mr. Berman, for your leadership.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I continue to reserve our time until the speakers 
are done on their side.
  Mr. BERMAN. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlelady from Nevada (Ms. 
Berkley).
  Ms. BERKLEY. I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his strong 
and very important leadership on this issue.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of this important resolution 
stating our position on the Durban Conference. Seven years ago, we 
watched in disgust as a conference on racism, a very important issue 
which demands the world's attention, was diverted into a hate fest 
against Israel and Jews everywhere where participants and outside 
groups attempted to paint Israel as an ``apartheid state'' guilty of 
``crimes against humanity.'' This kind of inflammatory speech does 
nothing to help the Palestinians. And it certainly does nothing to help 
those who are truly oppressed by racist regimes.
  We now hear of new attempts to hijack the review conference to be 
held next year. The Organization of Islamic Conference says they want 
to highlight ``new forms of racism'' such as blasphemy against Islam 
while continuing to focus on spewing anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist 
hatred. We must stop these cynical attempts to divert attention away 
from the human rights abuses in places like Iran and Saudi Arabia and 
put the spotlight squarely where it belongs, on real forms of racism, 
slavery and xenophobia, which is what this conference is supposed to be 
about and which it should be about.
  I urge support for this resolution.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. I have no further requests for time, and I will 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BERMAN. I have one additional speaker. I'm very pleased to yield 
3 minutes to the gentlelady from Texas, a member of the House Foreign 
Affairs Committee and a participant in the last conference, Ms. Sheila 
Jackson-Lee.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I too want to add my 
appreciation to the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Berman of 
California, and the ranking member, Ms. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who was 
obviously here during that first Durban Conference in 2001.
  Interestingly enough, that conference preceded the horrific tragedy 
that occurred in this country. I might venture to say that the contempt 
and hatred that was expressed there certainly did not help in adding to 
the idea that we are all part of the human family. But I will say to 
you that this is a characterization of relief.
  And I do thank my colleague from California, Congresswoman Barbara 
Lee. Both of us were on that early delegation. But more importantly we 
worked extensively to pressure, if you will, the Bush administration to 
actually send a high level delegation. In fact I believe that if we had 
sent a high-level delegation, many of us many times will argue for 
boycotting. In this instance, we worked with Secretary Powell and 
begged him to go so that he could put a face of America, and that face 
of America will be in conjunction with the basis of this particular 
conference, and that is for the first time to be able to hold a 
conference that marked an important recognition of the historic wounds 
raised or caused by slavery, colonialism and related ongoing racism, 
racial discrimination, including the recognition of trans-Atlantic 
slave trade as a crime against humanity and the people of African 
descent, people of Asian descent, and indigenous people, and as well to 
stamp out racial discrimination against persons of African descent, 
members of Jewish, Muslim, castes, indigenous Roma and Sinti and other 
communities. That is what we were supposed to be doing. But because I 
believe we did not send a high-level delegation, it was hijacked. We 
were hoodwinked. But I can assure you that as I can recount the actions 
of those of us who went unofficially claiming we were official, we were 
running from one meeting to the next to be able to argue for the 
purpose of this particular conference, putting the message of America 
forward, suggesting that we want to stamp out racism and anti-Semitism

[[Page 20265]]

and other forms of discrimination. We were there on the front line.
  This is an important statement. And that statement says that America 
does recognize the sins of the past, that we do embrace those around 
the world who have suffered injustices, and we reject the anti-Semitism 
or creating an opportunity for this to be a cause of bashing Israel. 
But I believe that as we go as a full delegation, which I hope that 
many of us will again be able to attend the Durban review in 2009, you 
will see the opportunity for African Americans and those descendants of 
slaves around the world, those who are presently abused, you will see a 
standing up for the cause of eliminating and eradicating racism 
wherever it is and scapegoating any people, which includes as well the 
Jewish people and the State of Israel.
  Madam Speaker, I believe that this is a right step. I wish we had had 
this document. I wish we had had a high-level delegation some years 
ago. And if I might quickly acknowledge Mary Robinson.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman from Texas has 
expired.
  Mr. BERMAN. I yield the gentlelady an additional 30 seconds.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I acknowledge the then Human Rights 
Commissioner, Mary Robinson, who was the architect somewhat of this 
idea. Her heart was in the right place. She was there. She wanted us to 
speak on the issues that this conference needed to grapple.
  Racism, Madam Speaker, is intrinsic. It is deep. It is in the souls 
of many. It covers ethnicities and language. It is difficult to deal 
with. This is an important conference. This legislation should craft 
it, design it and stand for it in the right way.
  Let me thank the NAACP for its support of this legislation. And I 
understand Wade Henderson, who was one of the architects of working 
with this, this is the right direction to go. I'm looking forward to a 
conference that speaks to the issues and embraces all of those who have 
been victims of racism and discrimination and to end it forever and 
ever.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Madam Speaker, I rise to support H. Res. 1361, 
a resolution that urges the U.S. government to prevent the upcoming 
U.N. World Conference on Racism from being hijacked by those seeking to 
spread anti-Semitism and hate. The theory behind a conference on 
racism, where members of all nations come together to fight hate and 
promote diversity, is an important goal. Unfortunately, just as they 
have in the past, the organizers of this U.N. conference on Racism seem 
to have buried the task at hand.
  In 2001, the conference was held in Durban, South Africa, and was 
hijacked and transformed into an anti-Israel tirade. While racism and 
the promotion of hate are taught in many classrooms around the world, 
the organizers of this U.N. conference unfairly chose to single out 
Israel. This must stop.
  The United States must take a leadership role now, while the 
conference is still in planning stages, to ensure that such a 
despicable charade will not be repeated. The administration must work 
with our allies and use its leverage to ensure that this conference 
lives up to its name. And, if it seems that the conference is going to 
mock the world's fight against racism and it becomes clear that the 
conference will become a forum to promote hate and anti-Israel 
sentiment, then I urge the administration to pull U.S. support and work 
with our allies to show the conference for what it is: a sham.
  Finally, I join the sponsors of this legislation in commending the 
efforts of our allies, France, Canada, and Israel for declaring their 
intentions not to participate in Durban II if its agenda is diverted.
  It is imperative that the United States not stand idly by while 
countries around the world belittle the fight against racism. I look 
forward to working with my colleagues, the administration and countries 
around the world until we get this right.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time, 
and I yield back the balance of our time.
  Mr. BERMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield back our time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Berman) that the House suspend the rules 
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 1361, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the resolution, as amended, was agreed to.
  The title of the resolution was amended so as to read: ``Expressing 
the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States should 
lead a high-level diplomatic effort to ensure that the Durban Review 
Conference serves as a forum to review implementation of commitments 
made at the 2001 Durban Conference to combat all forms of racism by 
defeating the campaign by some members of the Organization of the 
Islamic Conference to divert the United Nation's Durban Review 
Conference from a review of problems in their own and other countries 
by attacking Israel, promoting anti-Semitism, and undermining the 
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.''.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________