OCTOBER 2001

Pusch Commey reports from the third UN World Conference Against Racism Xenophobia and Related Intolerance held in Durban, South Africa, from 31 August to 8 September.

INobody said it was going to be easy. There were too many walking wounded and too few admissions of guilt. Others, like the US, opted to walk away from the truth. The truth that would set them free. The truth that their country was built on the back of slavery, the greatest crime against humanity, and that it was time to pay for the world that slavery built.

For the record, the US did not attend the two previous UN racism conferences in 1978 and 1983 either.

However, about 17,000 delegates and 750 journalists still made the pilgrimage to Durban.

It was a conference of the oppressed, and the big powers were not going to be put in the dock that easily. They even refused to pay their share of the conference expenses, leaving the South African government to foot all the £10m bill.

But squeezing the conference financially did not stop it from happening. For eight months, the Americans and the British had pussyfooted and when their threat of a boycott also failed, they sent the lowest level delegations ... just to go and see.

No European head of state made an appearance either. But Fidel Castro of Cuba was there, and so were leaders of a number of African countries. Which prompted Uganda’s president, Yoweri Museveni, to dismiss the racism story as all nonsense because everybody came from Africa. ?Then some left, went to other places and lost their colour. They came back to say they are superior to those they had left behind,? he said in his speech.

President Castro, as usual, took centre stage to wild applause. He gave a deep analysis of the effect of racism which, he said, was the causative factor in a world where the plunderers and robbers preside over the instruments of oppression and watch while children starve and die.

He spoke from the heart, and accused the US and Europe of wanting to continue to plunder Africa and increase attempts to divide the continent while keeping it involved in conflict.

Mary Robinson, the UN high commissioner for human rights, saw it as a unique opportunity to right historical wrongs. Nelson Mandela called racism a disease. Kofi Annan, the UN secretary general, said ?our aim must be to banish from this century the hatred and prejudice that have disfigured the previous centuries.?

The two most contentious issues, reparations for slavery and the Palestinian question, dominated the conference as expected. It was the draft resolution of the 1,300 NGOs, calling Israel an ?apartheid racist state? for its treatment of the Palestinians, that was seized upon by America and Israel to walk out of the conference.

The European Union also threatened to pull out in solidarity. Five large European and American NGOs, including Human Rights Watch, broke ranks under pressure from their governments and dissociated themselves.

But the conference had hardly begun, and no declaration had been finalised. There was unanimity that the real issue was the American fear of a discussion of reparations for slavery. Having failed to suppress the freedom of speech, the US saw its chances diminish. The door became the most convenient route out.

That the conference was a face-off between the rich and poor, oppressor and oppressed, the guilty and the victims, was not in doubt. That the root of racism in the world was economic was also all too apparent as the North closed ranks with their surrogates to defend their positions and bully everybody into submission. That the South African government managed to steer the conference to a successful conclusion, was a miracle.

Punctuated by the death of his famous father, Govan Mbeki, President Thabo Mbeki had to shuttle back and forth, duck and dive to convince delegates to find common ground. His foreign minister, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, who was the president of the conference, lost much sleep to get delegates to stay the course.

But South Africa had little joy about its position on reparations. It didn’t want massive payouts by the former slavers, but rather a partnership in which the West would financially support the new economic plan for African, the New African Initiative, a hybrid of the Millennium African Plan (MAP) pioneered by President Mbeki and the Omega Plan by the Senegalese president, Abdoulaye Wade.

South Africa itself had been criticised for delaying reparation payments to its apartheid victims, and for coercing Namibia into dropping its demand for reparations for the sins of apartheid South Africa during the occupation of Namibia.

In the process, Nigeria, Namibia, Zambia and others, prompted by the African-Americans, refused to toe the line in what they saw as a cop out. The promises of the West, from the African-American experience, were a promise to the wind.

The South African position, however, was music to the ears of the European Union (EU) whose delegates chose to stay and see what they could get. They were the wiser.

Doing the ostrich, like the US, was not going to make the issue of slavery and reparations go away. It was a fundamental question if justice, as defined by the very same countries, was to be done or seen to be done. It seemed that when it came to reparations, the lighter your skin the better your chances. Racism, even here, was all too apparent.

The African Diaspora had come in force and would not be swayed by any sophistry. The Congressional Black Caucus led the chase, and even took a moment to recognise the presence of one of the most important civil rights leaders in America, Dr Dorothy Heights, 89.

The highly acclaimed book, The Debt: What America Owes To Blacks, by Randall Robinson, did good business. It lays bare the facts. With the abolition of slavery in America, President Lincoln paid compensation to the slave owners in 1865 while the slaves themselves got nothing.


The arguments

The worst effect of slavery and colonialism is psychological. It is about people from whom everything was stolen — language, religion, mothers, fathers, children, and their memory of who they are.

The former slavers wanted to confuse it, deny it, and argue the past away. But Africa and its Diaspora insisted that ?you cannot live the present and go into the future without looking at the past?.

It went to the wire. It became a war of wording. What went into the final declaration led to a protracted cat-fight, causing an extension of the conference to an unscheduled 8th day, the 8th of September.

The topical Palestinian issue was vigorously suppressed. Perhaps to be tragically revisited on the Pentagon and the World Trade Centre.

The issue of whether ?slavery was a crime against humanity? (which Africa and the Diaspora wanted) or just ?an appalling tragedy? (which the EU wanted) assumed centre stage.

Representing the EU was the Belgian foreign minister, Louis Michel. He described himself as a hard negotiator. For them money was everything and they dreaded the flood of lawsuits that may follow if they accepted their guilt and apologised. There are no limitations of statutes for crimes against humanity and thus Africa and the Diaspora stuck to their guns.

At an 11th-hour press conference on the 7th day, the EU bobbed and wove — and again threatened to pull out of the conference. Louis Michel tried the same old tricks of history. Fluent in English, he talked about his love of the African people, their warmth, and their intelligence... He waxed lyrical about the amount of aid that the EU gives to Africa.

When asked by a journalist from the New York-based December 12 Movement, about the rape, robbery, murder and genocide carried out in Africa by EU members, Louis Michel quickly switched to French, prompting the questioner to ask him: ?So now you don’t understand English??


Extra time

On 8 September, in extra time, it was the exhausted and relieved duo of Mary Robinson and Nkosazana Zuma who came out smiling. They had a final declaration.

It recognised the suffering of the Palestinian people under foreign occupation, and slavery as a crime against humanity, but with several disclaimers by the EU to prevent any future claims. The EU members rather promised to help Africa with development aid. But there was no obligation linked to the slavery and colonialism question.

In conclusion, Nkosazana Zuma pointed out that it was more about dignity than about money, and that the declaration was a weapon to be used to wipe out the scourge of racism which had its tentacles in history and every facet of modern life. But she didn’t add that there is little dignity without money in today’s world.

In the end, the African Diaspora decided to carry the fight to their home turf in the Americas.

Perhaps more fulfilling, from an African point of view, was the congregation of so many beautiful African brothers and sisters from all corners of the globe, and the opportunity to network and share experiences, knowing in our hearts that we are all one.

For the Diasporan Africans, many of whom were setting foot on the motherland for the first time, the feeling was indescribable. Some shed tears, some kissed the soil and vowed to be back.

Having seen Africa, alone, had been worth their while. The motherland had given them the spiritual strength to continue the long battle against racism in their adopted homelands. In their hearts, they knew that apology for slavery (and the compensation thereof) has only been postponed.

Back to the top
Contents