Go Figure

How is it possible for the State Department to be so entirely obtuse on the one hand, and so entirely astute on the other? We won’t go over the obtuse parts. However, U.S. policy on UN Security Council resolutions and U.S. policy on the UN Conference on Racism in Durban have both been real winners – for Jews, for Israel and for American leadership.

How is it possible for the State Department to be so entirely obtuse on the one hand, and so entirely astute on the other? We won’t go over the obtuse parts. However, U.S. policy on UN Security Council resolutions and U.S. policy on the UN Conference on Racism in Durban have both been real winners – for Jews, for Israel and for American leadership.

The Durban conference has been hijacked. Enemies of Israel and anti-Semites of all stripes are using the venue not only to delegitimize the State and Government of Israel, but Jews everywhere who believe in the historic and religious ties between Jews and the land. The U.S. has firmly, loudly and publicly refused to play. The State Department instructed representatives at the pre-conference meetings to object to any attempt to associate Zionism and Israel with racism, and to insist that Secretary Powell’s participation in the conference (the prize the UN REALLY wants) is contingent on producing documents that do not single out any country (read “Israel”) as racist.

It is hard not to be there, but is important not to be if Israel is targeted for international calumny. This is not unilateralist. It is the exercise of leadership in an international forum based on our principles. It is too bad for those who really meant to make progress in a serious forum, but the United States cannot promote the legitimate rights and interest of some parties by stepping on the neck of other parties. And we expect our friends to reconsider their positions as well. In fact, a number of countries have indicated that they will follow our lead and downgrade their representation in Durban.

Leading from principle worked at the UN Security Council this week as well. In an unusual meeting (opened to non-Security Council countries) the U.S. bluntly derailed a Palestinian proposal for international monitors in Israel. The language was terrific (thank you, Ambassador Cunningham): “What is required now is not rhetoric, not debate that polarizes an already volatile situation, and certainly not an effort to condemn one side with unbalanced charges or to impose unworkable ideas that will not change the reality on the ground.”

But better still, so clear had the U.S. been about a veto that the other permanent members of the Security Council (Britain, France, Russia and China) declined even to discuss the Palestinian proposal. And, finally, Singapore, a rotating member, cast its lot with the U.S., making a vote on the proposal and the American veto unnecessary. Both permanent and rotating members said it was most important to have unity in the Security Council (read “U.S. leadership”) and that the U.S. was the acknowledged lead player in any Middle East-related action.

Both of these are victories for Israel. But perhaps more important in the long run, they are the beginning of an assertive American foreign policy that defends its friends and its principles. It is only fair that other countries be able to rely on a consistent American application of those principles in international organizations, and that our adversaries be able to rely on the same thing.