Reviewing Durban: Examining the Outputs and Review of the 2001 World Conference against Racism
| DOI | 10.1177/016934410902700204 |
| Author | Corinne Lennox |
| Published date | 01 June 2009 |
| Date | 01 June 2009 |
| Subject Matter | Part A: Article |
Netherlands Q uarterly of Human Ri ghts, Vol. 27/2, 191–235, 2009.
© Netherlands I nstitute of Human Rig hts (SIM), Printed in the Net herlands. 191
REVIEWING DURBAN: EXAMINING THE
OUTPUTS AND REVIEW OF THE 2001
WORLD CONFERENCE AGAINST RACISM
C L*
Abstract
e Durban Review Conference (DRC) held in Geneva, 20–24 April 2009, marked a
return to the controversial 2001 World Conference Against Racism (WCAR) held in
Durban, South Africa. e outputs of the 2001 conference have been overshadowed
by 9/11 and the ‘war on terror’. Civil society has struggled to secure implementation
of the commitments made. is article considers the long view of inter-State debates
around racism and discusses some key issues that have emerged in the DRC processes.
e WCAR follow-up mechanisms are critiqu ed and the successes of two groups at the
WCAR, Afro-descendant s and Dalits, are highlighted. e particular focus on the nex us
of racism and religious discr imination in the DRC inter-State debates is considered.
1. INTRODUCTION
In December 2006, t he UN General Assembly adopted a resolution cal ling for a review
conference of the UN World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination,
Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (WCAR), held in Durban, South Afr ica, 31 August
– 8 September 2001. e so-called Durban Review Conference (DRC) was held 20–
24 April 2009. e DRC initiative was taken pr incipally by the Group of African St ates
and the member States of the Orga nisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC). Among
their chief concerns was the need to address new forms of contemporary racism,
xenophobia and related intolerance that have emerged or increased since 9/11. ese
* e author wou ld like to acknowledge the i mportant contributions had f rom individuals engaged
in the WCAR and DRC proces ses that were interviewed in c onnection with this re search project.
e author also extends her t hanks to Annelie se Baldaccini and Ke vin Boyle for their suppor t. e
article dr aws also from the author’s persona l experience as a part icipant in the 2001 WCAR in her
capacity as Advocacy O cer, Minority Right s Group International (2001–2006). She is currently
a PhD Candidate i n the Department of Internat ional Relations, London School of E conomics and
Political Scienc e (LSE), the United Kingdom. Unless ind icated otherwise, a ll internet sources were
last accesse d on 3 May 2009.
Corinne Lennox
192 Intersentia
include Islamophobia, discriminatory anti-terrorism measures and the treatment of
migrant groups. Alt hough reviews of UN world conferences are not uncommon, the
proposal to review the 2001 WCAR put many on edge and resurrected the negative
sentiment that has become the un fortunate legacy of Durban. is a rticle will review
the DRC processes and provide insight into the debates a nd challenges by examining
the controversies surrounding t he 2001 WCAR and the practice of the Durban fol low-
up mechanisms. e discussion will reveal the di culties in making international
dialogue on racism more const ructive and demonstrate how some victims of raci sm,
including Afro-de scendants and Dalits, nevertheless have used t his dialogue to their
advantage.
e 2001 WCAR was predated by the rst world conference on racism held in
Geneva in 1978 and the second, al so in Geneva, in 1983. e decision to hold a third
world conference was not inevitable: by many accounts the rst two had been largely
ine ective. ese conferences were dominated by acrimonious inter-State debates
focused overwhelming ly on Israel, Palestine and South Africa, providing little space
for civil society engagement nor any genuine review of State practice domestically.
e third conference, coming at the start of a new century, following a decade of
increased con dence in multilatera l processes, and with a large pool of interest from
civil societ y, was supposed to herald a new wave of commitment to equalit y, justice and
non-discrimination. For the victims of racia l discrimination and related intolerance
that travelled from far and wide to be present it was a deeply moving experience;
for South Africans and the rest of the world it was a highly symbolic event, another
signpost in the triu mph over Apartheid.
ree days a er the conference ended, following a surge of diplomacy to secure
a text amidst the controversial departure of the US and Israeli delegations, the 9/11
attacks occurred in the United States. e convergence of these events has impacted
signi cantly on the post-WCAR follow-up, shi ing world focus to anti-terrorism
measures and related security concerns. Many of the fault lines exposed at Durban,
however, are the same as the posited root causes of the (not so) new global divide.
ese include the economic dominance of the Western States, the harmful legacies
of colonialism, failure to secure peace in the Middle East and the persistence of
xenophobia and discrimination across ethnic, religious and cultural boundaries
globally. e 2001 WCAR did not set out to tackle all of these issues – indeed, only
xenophobia and discrimination were explicitly in its mandate – but these issues
nevertheless came to dominate the debate and distracted attention from the core
objectives of the conference.
ese core objective s were to review progress and obstacle s in addressing racism,
giving particular attention to the ‘victims of racism’, and to agree strategies for
combating racism at the international, regional and national levels.1 States agreed
1 UN General Assembly Res. 52/111, ird Decade to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination
and the convening of a world conference against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and
Examin ing the Outputs and Rev iew of the 2001 World Conference Again st Racism
Netherlands Q uarterly of Human R ights, Vol. 27/2 (2009) 193
a detailed outcome document, the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action
(DDPA),2 and established several new follow-up mechanisms. Arguably the greatest
success of the 2001 WCAR was what it o ered to civil society, in particular to victim
groups. Durban and its preparatory processes were important political opportunity
structures for social mobilisation of victims of racism and discrimination; for
recognition of their identities a nd concerns; and for pushing the normative bounda ries
governing their right s in a way that was not in evidence at the 1978 and 1983 meetings.
For some groups, including Afro-descendants and Dalits, the WCAR helped to
catalyse a new transnational mobilisation of their communities and garnered them
unprecedented attention both domestica lly and on the international stage.
Much of the positive e orts by civil society to make their voice heard, however,
have been forgotten among the critiques of the Durba n NGO Forum, wherein a small
minority expressed their objections to Zionism and to Israel’s actions against the
Palestinia ns, including through statements of a nti-Semitism. is evidence of racism
among some of the civil society participants of the WCAR, coupled with the inter-
State debates that overwhelmingly targeted Israel, and the bitter disputes over key
issues of reparations for slavery and colonialism, have le Durban with a negative
reputation. e net e ect is what one UN delegate has termed ‘Durba nophobia’, which
can be de ned as the fear of or aversion to any discussion pertaining to the WCAR
and its key debates. is phobia seems to have gripped the UN i nstitutions and is most
evident in the low-key approach taken to the WCAR follow-up mechanisms. ese
mechanisms have been under-funded, under-promoted and poorly attended by civil
society.
e DRC is only the latest chapter i n a long history of inter-State debates on racism.
To understand why the DRC is controversial and what its potential impact might
be, it is necessary to consider the long view of world conferences on racism. ese
conferences have been used by States to advance their interests using accusations
of racism as a proxy for other (material) concerns. Norms against racism are rmly
entrenched – no State wants to be called racist. Using these norms for critiquing
State practice therefore can be ver y potent. At the same time, there continues to be a
tension between using international dialogue on racism as a proxy for State interests
and using the dialogue for bona de review of State practice to combat racism and
discrimination. e ostensible international commitment to addressing racism is
positive; its application has been di scredited because very little focus is put on e orts
to monitor and improve State practice domestically. During the 2001 WCAR, the
victims of racism made strong e orts to steer the dialogue in a more constructive
direction. At Durba n their success was mixed; the ex periences of the Durban follow-
related intole rance, UN Doc. A/RES/52/111, 18 February 1998, pa ra. 28; and Agenda of the World
Conference, UN Doc. A/CONF.189/1/Rev.1, 2 September 2001.
2 Report of the World Conference against Racism, Racial Di scrimination, Xenophobia and Related
Intolerance, UN Doc. A/CON F.189/12, 25 January 2 002, chapter 1, pp. 5–75.
To continue reading
Request your trial